1 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

«n»
«Category_eng»
Doi «DOI»
ISSN 2566-4484

«INFO» «Next Record»

DIVERSITY OF RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS OF NIŠ PERIPHERY – CONTRIBUTION TO THE

GUIDELINES OF FUTURE URBAN-POLICY

Abstract:
The area of Niš, the third Serbian most populated city, has a dynamic topography. Located in a
valley crossed by several rivers, surrounded by hills and plains, the rural settlements around the city,
that were administratively integrated into it, are extremely diverse. The consequences of such variety
are many, reflecting on residential block concepts and increasing everyday challenges in urban
planning. In this paper, we analyzed the three villages for which urban plans were done for the first
time in 2023. These settlements are located within a radius of about 10 km from the city center. This
paper is a scientific elaboration of the urban plans that were presented as single exhibit at the annual
international Salon of Urbanism, held in the Republic of Serbia, and was awarded by the Association
of Urban Planners of Serbia in 2023.
Keywords: classification of settlement, urban planning, peri-urban area, rural development, block

РАЗНОВРСНОСТ СТАМБЕНИХ БЛОКОВА НА ПЕРИФЕРИЈИ ГРАДА НИША –

ДОПРИНОС СМЕРНИЦАМА БУДУЋЕ УРБАНЕ ПОЛИТИКЕ

Апстракт:
Подручје Ниша, трећег по величини града у Србији, карактерише динамична топографије.
Обзиром да је град лоциран у котлини коју пресеца више река, окружен брдима и заравнима,
сеоска насеља око града, а која су административно интегрисана у градско подручје, изузетно
су разноврсна. Последице такве разноврсности су бројне, и рефлектују се на концепт
стамбених блокова и додатне свакодневне изазове у урбаном планирању. У овом раду,
анализирали смо три села за који је, по први пут, израђени урбанистички планови током 2023.
године. Ова насеља, налазе се у пoлупречнику од око 10km од центра града. Овај рад je научнa
разрадa урбанистичких планова који су представљани као јединствен рад на годишњем
међународном Салону урбанизма који се одржава у Републици Србији, награђен од стране
Удружења урбаниста Србије на Салону урбанизма 2023.г.

Кључне речи: класификација насеља, урбанистичко планирање, периурбано поручје, рурални

развој, блок
2 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

1. INTRODUCTION
The Balkan Peninsula has a rich topographic diversity and the area of Nish reflects that very well.
Compared to flat Vojvodina or fully hilly Western Serbia, the area of Nish includes both hills and
valleys - “a bit of all” types of terrains. The microclimate is milder than in most parts of the country.
There are short, but snowy winters, early spring, and draughts in the summer, prevented by waters
from springs and rivers – numerous but not particularly rich in water. Such circumstances create
permanent challenge for urban planners and also have a strong effect on the overall development of
the area.
Numerous migrations [1] and topographic diversity caused a great variety of living conditions and
approaches between relatively near villages. The history of urban planning in Niš started
approximately 150 years ago, however rural development received insufficient attention from the
local authorities until a decade ago. It changed with the enlarging the administrative area of the city
to 596,73km2, incorporating numerous villages, and adopting the Spatial plan for the administrative
area of Niš 2021 [2]. Global changes put peri-urban and rural development into new perspective.
Urban plans have been arranged in 2022-2023 for three former villages for the first time: Kapetanove
pojate (KP), Lalinske pojate (LP), and Radikina Bara (RB). They are situated within a radius of
10km from the city centre (fig.1). Although rather near to each other, their residential blocks
significantly differ.
The planning was based on recognizing original patterns and identifying order in existing urban
morphology, learning from it, and plan changes which will provide long-term benefits for the
settlements. Those three urban plans were exhibited together and awarded at the International Salon
of Urbanism in 2023 by Serbian Association of Urban Planners.
This paper is scientific elaboration of that exhibit. It is expected that the conclusions contribute
future urban polices for Serbian territories.

Figure 1. Location of Kapetove Pojate, Lalinske Pojate, and Radikina Bara from
Nish centre - the green ring marks 10km distance
3 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

2. MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

2.1. MATERIALS
Kapetanove pojate (19 ha), toponym also known as Paprat, is in the centre of Niš tourist area B,
situated near city’s favourite picnic area, Kamenicki vis (in Serbian: Каменички вис), along the
road connecting Cerjanska cave, opened for tourists, and historical site Cegar (in Serbian: Чегар).
Currently, a dozen of weekend houses is scattered on both sides of the road near known water spring,
and surrounded by the woods. The purpose of the urban plan (fig. 2) is to enable it to become a
permanent settlement, with functions that provide basic self-sufficiency of the settlement. The area
is also rich in wood.

Figure 2. Excerption for the urban plan for detailed arrangements for
Kapetanove Pojate
The urban intervention was mostly directed towards finding regularity in formerly forest roads, and
defining for the first time the planned urban morphology - the core of future urbanity.
4 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

Lalinske pojate (46 ha) was originally a dislocated agglomeration of premises for agricultural
purposes, separated from the village of origin by the river South Morava. The word “pojate” means
premises for agricultural tools, hay, and even animals, and, ethimologically, the place where animals
drink water. Its meaning is related but different from, also frequent, toponym “katun”, a Vlachos-
Albanian word for temporary, typically summer shelter for shepherds. The extension of village
Lalinac developed in the 20th century, but some premises existed much longer. The settlement is
predominantly surrounded by wheat fields and it conspicuously lacks trees, public services and
amenities. Common public places for children and the entire community were at the top of the list
of requests by residents, regarding the expectations from an urban plan.

Figure 3. The excerpt from the urban plan for detailed arrangements for Lalinske
pojate [3]
The local community-initiated land consolidation, which happened several decades ago.
Consequently, the sizes of the blocks are bigger than expected. The plot in the centre of the village
was segregated in that process because it forms a natural terrace, a few meters high, with a nice view
to the otherwise flat area, including view to the river South Morava. It is narrow, distinctively long
and steep, and as such unsuitable for agriculture. Therefore, it was chosen for the new linear centre
of the village. The residential blocks were designed to meet needs of rural households, with un-
detached houses and many auxiliary facilities on large construction plots, with area of over 1000m2
in average (fig. 3).
Radikina Bara (107 ha) was an almost abandoned village two decades ago, however investment in
water supply infrastructure, in addition to the natural beauty of the landscape, and rare suitability of
the top of the hill for paragliding - enabled revival. The authorities of the nearby spa, centre of the
tourist area A - Niška Banja, (which is one of the city municipalities, currently going through
development crisis due to lack of land for development), recognize this village as suitable for
extension of its own tourist area (New Niška Banja). The advantages of this location are several: it’s
only three kilometres away, having access to the same praised water springs, it is located close to
the crest between two valleys, having an exceptional view, furthermore, it is south orientated, with
many sunny hours per year. The vernacularly formed streets of the village turned out to be unusable
to high extant for the desired purpose. Existing roads are both narrow and steep, and that is why:
• from the existing vernacular transportation network, only the part which follows the
isohypses (approximately 4km or 50% of the existing streets) was preserved, and
reconstructed using natural, ecological materials, with high water absorption capacity, and
• in total, 80% of preserved existing routes are kept as pedestrian, or dominantly pedestrian,

• while providing new, fast access by the outer ring, along which many public parking lots
are situated, to motivate users not to use cars inside the ring, unless absolutely necessary;
5 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

• finally, the terrain is dominantly steep with an inclination between 15-40%, meaning that
it is suitable almost exclusively for terraced houses (fig. 4). That implies that significant
changes are required for reaching expected land-use efficiency. The intervention includes
locations for solar power plants, tourist areas for investors of diverse capacities, and new
main and auxiliary sports facilities for paragliding. Terraced houses are not common in the
South of Serbia, and it was necessary to adopt strategy, tools and instrument which would
favour such development.

Figure 4. The excerpt from the urban plan for detailed arrangements for
Radikina Bara [4]
The residential blocks in these three villages vary in:
- Size, including the size of the average land plot in the range from 250m2 to over 1500 m2,
- Prevailing purpose (urban living/rural living/tourism),
- Inclination of terrain,
- Characteristics of the natural environment (infield/forest). (Figure 5)
In all three cases, around 10% of the area is reserved for transportation, and around 50% of the
respective area is designated for construction, keeping the capacity to balance climate change and
locally-generated carbon emission and pollution. The building coverage ratio is under 0.5 in
residential blocks in the all three villages. Reaching “maximum 10% for the transportation “was
particularly challenging in the case of Radikina Bara, where it was achieved through a radical
custom-made concept. Numerical outcome, was better than expected – under 12% for transportation,
6 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

including public parking areas which cover all needs respectively. Providing that literally all streets
are fully walkable (with longitudinal inclination under 2%), was particularly important because of
dominantly tourist future purpose of the area, and demanding, at the same time, considering that the
difference in altitude between the lowest and the highest point is 335m (Table 1.)

Figure 5. Types of the residential blocks in A. Kapetanove Pojate B. Lalinske pojate

(excerption from the exhibition poster from Salon of Urbanism 2023, [5] )
7 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

Table 1 Overview of data for Kapetanove Pojate (KP), Lalinske Pojate (LP), and
Radikina Bara (RB)
Site Area Altitude Range of Transportation Prevailing type of Number of GBA
scope (m) block sizes Area (%) houses storeys (ha)
(ha) (P-ground
floor) (Gross
building
area)
1 KP 19.6 623-649 0.25-1.9 4.9 Un-detached house P+2 2.5
2 LP 60.8 179-190 0.1-5.0 4.3 Un-detached house P+2 12
3 RB 103.5 285-620 0.25-3.4 10.6 Terraced houses P+1 42

Kapetanove Pojate

Lalinske Pojate

Radikina Bara
Figure 6. Geological characteristics of terrain [6]
8 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

Figure 7. Original excerpt from urban plan for Radikina Bara – Rules of
Construction [7] for Terraced Houses
(in English: 3.1.16. GENERAL CONSTRUCTION RULES FOR TERRACE BUILDINGS The terrain is not suitable for
construction if the slope is greater than 45%. If the slope of the terrain is 20% - 45%, for buildings larger than 50m2 of gross
building area, and more than 70m2 of gross floor area, the construction of terraced buildings is mandatory. On terrain with
a slope of 15-20%, the construction of terraced buildings is not mandatory, but it is recommended. Specific general building
rules apply to terraced buildings, which refer to:
- the height of the object, - number of storeys, - distance from neighboring buildings and - the maximum allowable floor area
ratio, as explained below.
For a terraced building, it is necessary to determine the "highest allowable reference height of the building". The highest
reference height of the building is determined by comparing the height of the building from the ground to the top in the
characteristic sections of each lamella of the terraced building; the highest comparative value of the height through the
lamella is taken as the "highest reference height of the object" which is used instead of the total "height of the object" to
determine the fulfilment of the given urban requirements regarding the highest allowable height. For the terraced building,
it is necessary to determine the "reference building storey" which is determined by arranging the spatiality in the
characteristic sections from the ground to the top of each lamella of the terraced building, the object of the occupied object
in the object that relates to the objects that relate to the objects. It is further used instead of the total "storey building" to
check the fulfilment of the conditions on the permissible dexterity.
The minimum distance from the neighboring building in the case of terraced buildings is determined in relation to the
"reference height of the building" instead of in relation to the total "height of the building". Restrictions regarding the
maximum allowed floor area do not apply to terraced buildings. a ˃b˃c
The reference height of the object is "a", a a≤ the maximum allowed height of the object
The maximum number of floors of the building is Basement+Ground Floor+1 (example from the picture)
Basement + ground floor + 1 ≤ maximum allowed floor of the building.
Terraced buildings in the area of this Plan, as a rule, have access to two or more streets, and the zero point must be
determined as the mean value of the level of the street front of one of them.
The connection to the public infrastructure can be achieved via one of the access streets or several of them.)
9 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

2.2. METHODOLOGY
Following our intention to scientifically elaborate the abovementioned urban plans, we applied
observation method and content analyses.
Among numerous issues addressed in these urban plans, as land abandonment, structural adjustment,
adopt land use pattern, resilience to climate change, and, rural revitalization, whose research would
exceed the scope of this paper, we focused on what came first - problem of settlement classification,
and we discussed it in relation with territorial disparity and climate change resilience.
This research is step towards bridging the gap between practice and theory, which in case of good
theory shouldn’t exists.

3. SETTLEMENT CLASSIFICATION
The classification of settlements is one of the frequent problems in a scientific research of this kind.
A problem, which seems formal and typically gets superficial attention in professional practice, is
an important question in scientific terms, however, with non-univocal answer. Traditional urban-
rural dichotomy is not adequate for defining territorial disparity nowadays, and there are many
approaches which have been used for identification of urban, rural and peri-urban areas. The most
widely used methods are those based on demographic and socio-economic variables [8]. Statistical
offices, national authorities and scholars contributed taxonomy over the years (ib), resulting in tens
of different classification methods, which focus, with different variations, on demographic
dynamics, economic and social indictors, settlement structure, distance, or the combination of the
previous.

Table 2: The five clusters of urban–rural methods and the variables they use to distinguish
between territories [8]

Application of the first one results in unprecise or even wrong dichotomy, while the fourth –
distance, defines the areas as urban fringes but has no relevance in the comparison, leaving at stake
the middle two or their combinations (Table 2). Economic and social indictors are also of limited
help, because economic activity is unmeasurable in practice. Based on specialization, LP can be
characterized as rural, with small statistical advantage compared to other occupations, while the
other two settlements do not have any specialization. However, the urban plans imply certain
economic specializations in the future, in which KP and RB should dominantly specialize in tourism.
For social indicators, data as “population changes, access to services, broadband internet
connectivity, house prices, tourism and land‐use/cover flows” are frequently used [9]. In current
state, population increases in the all three, however very slowly, and due to migration in 2 of 3 cases,
which happens because of equally-low house prices. Only LP shows some vitality and houses for
sale are not available there. Availability of public services may be often a useful indicator [10].
however, in our case, values are similar in all three cases (under 3km of distance for LP and RB,
slightly less convenient for KP).
If we add local specificness we come to the following. “In Serbia, the classification of cities and
urban areas is based on administrative divisions as defined by law. Serbia’s Local Self-Government
units (LSGs) are categorized as a 'city' or a 'municipality,' based on the Law on Territorial
Organization”… LSGs are further sub-divided into either urban or rural settlements. Typically, each
LSG has a central urban settlement and a network of rural settlements surrounding it… Therefore,
the territory and population of a “city” or “municipality” combines both urban and rural areas… The
city classifications used attempt reflect the Serbian and ECA context while also aligning with global
literature. The classification of cities as secondary is based on UN-HABITAT’s definition of cities
falling between 100,000 and 500,000…” [11]. In our case, the legal categorization may not be
applicable, because KP, LP and RB are not any more independent settlements, but urban areas within
administrative area of the city, i.e. rural (or not) areas within the city. Among them, only RB has
10 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

relevant history as an independent rural settlement, while LP and KP are more dependable and more
recent.
World Bank Serbia applied the following division:
• “Urban centre (city): The urban centre consists of contiguous grid cells with a density of at least
1,500 inhabitants per km² and a population of at least 50,000.
• Urban cluster (towns and suburbs): The urban cluster consists of contiguous grid cells with a
density of at least 300 inhabitants per km2 and has a population of at least 5,000 in the cluster. An
urban cluster can be a town or a suburban area.
• Rural grid cell: Rural clusters are villages that do not belong to an urban centre or urban cluster,
most these will have a density below 300 inhabitants per km2. “[11]
This classification was established because they have recognized that “demographic data defined by
administrative boundaries do not accurately capture the extent of urbanization in many countries
across the world” (ib), and that administrative data may not be “reflecting a precise picture of
Serbia’s urban system”, either. According to it, KP, LP and RB should belong to the urban cluster,
regarding disposition but not regarding density which is much below limit.
Considering that urban plans imply change, at this point we can identify link between theory and
practice – because the plans aimed to increase density to over 300 inhabitants per km2.
The classification used by the Italian Government in 2014-2020 considered the three different areas
in terms of altitude (mountain, plain, and hill) with the four categories of territories obtainable by
applying the OECD methodology: urban poles with more than 150 inhabitants/km2, predominantly
urban with population of rural municipalities <15% of total population, significantly rural with
population of rural municipalities >15% and 50% of total population etc. Eventually, they identified
urban poles, rural areas specializing in intensive agriculture, intermediate rural areas and rural areas
with development problems [12].
Structure of the settlements, described as “size of clusters of dwellings and settlements” (table 2)
appears crucial in our case, and for it, different variables may be adopted. Spatial characteristics
have been taken in account as relevant, indicatively, in countries with significant territorial
disparities as Italy [12] [13]In our case, block size and characteristics, which are result of
characteristics of terrain (geological, inclination, altitude etc.) are the only variables which
significantly differ, leading to very different approach in planning of each area.

4. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUDING REMARKS

Urban fringes develop faster than core areas (Cattivelli, Methods for the identification of urban, rural
and peri-urban areas in Europe: An overview, 2021). In 2020, 75% of Europeans have inhabited
urban areas: 42% in the cities and the remaining in towns and suburbs. In Serbia, 60% of the
population live in cities, contributing to 74% of all jobs and 75% of the national gross value added
(GVA) (World Bank Serbia, 2023). This higher economic contribution of cities than expected
according to size may be explained by economic advantages or “agglomeration economies” (ib), or
significant presence of creative industries (e.g. software industry, gaming) for which vicinity
reportedly matters [14]. In any case, urban areas economically matter, and urban fringes are places
where they spread [15]
Urban fringes are relevant for food supply chain, and, therefore in Serbia, conversion of agricultural
land is forbidden by law. Therefore, areas for living and work must remain where they have always
been with some adaptations. Former villages or weekend-settlements, which remain suitable for
such purpose, are rarely attached to the city, but more often create appearance of leapfrog
development. Nevertheless, they generate a sort of territorial continuum with the urban core due to
inherited both urban habits and transportation network, as well as with the rural areas in the vicinity.
That is because those areas are not new, but inhabited (not necessarily continuously) for hundreds
of years (unlike many cities e.g. in Asia). As such they are already well-adapted to the natural
environment, with substantial resilience built in operandum vivendi, and they have already gained
its place in the transportation network. Although, they may not have precise morphological identity
at the time, often being in the process of urban transformation, they contribute to the economy,
quality of living, and sustainability of the city or have potential to do so. They are resilient to
speculative construction, and favourable for children and older population. Many obstacles and
disadvantages of such areas, have reasonable solutions. For example, the entire water infrastructure
in KP can be fully local, which is often neglected despite it being very practical, efficient and as
such chosen as prevailing solution in many parts of the world. It is a paradox that Nish had one of
the biggest productions of integrated units for water treatment for residential areas until early 21st c,
but they were almost never applied locally. This is merely an illustration that technical solutions
11 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

which were not taken in the account nevertheless exist, and could increase standard of living at
reasonable price without increasing ecological footprint – solving localized problem by localized,
custom-made solution.

Figure 6 Arial view of Niš administrative area with topography [16]

Peri-urban and rural areas in relation to green transformation are sometimes discussed with positive
and sometimes with negative connotation, however they are considered relevant. World Bank Serbia
severely criticized such settlements as impossible to govern in sustainable terms, regarding in
particular infrastructural network and resilience to climate change [11]. Although it may be true in
some cases, and even frequently so in some countries, in case of Nish, based on the abovementioned
areas, it is not so, which easily may be extended to Southern Serbian cities or even entire Serbia.
The main reason for wrong conclusion is improper classification of such urban areas. The aspect
which was neglected, besides from humanistic values of such settlements, is overall existence and
relevance of heritage - transferred adoptability for populating certain area among generations, which
is by definition long-term sustainable despite oscillations.
The classification of settlements is closely related to territorial disparity, and they are often discussed
together due to inter-dependence. Lack of proper classification, the one which does not reflect true
territorial disparity misleads both scientists and professionals. For example, in Germany this issue
was addressed early – villages in German countries was almost obsessively researched since the late
19th c, and generalization for the country as a whole was created based on numerous studies of small
districts and comparative studies of historical and physical factors relevant for development and
regional variations [17]. This early inductive research probably contributed that Germany nowadays
has equally developed territory, with cases of higher economic contribution to GVA from rural areas
(due to some international corporation situated literary in a small, wider-unknown village) than from
some big urban areas (e.g. Berlin).
For example, data shows that 1km of street with the following infrastructure in Nish on average
costs four times more than in Novi Sad [18]. That means, to achieve the same economic results, the
comparative advantages of the location must be used four times more efficiently than in the area of
Novi Sad, being used merely as a reference. That implies that the strategy of development must be
more carefully planned and that the entire process is essentially different in the south than in the
north of Serbia, but furthermore, in Serbia, it is fundamentally different among a few urban areas
barely 15km away. Having such great diversity (fig. 6), additional attention must be paid to the
strategy of planning areas in hilly terrains, because they represent at the same time both
disadvantages and outstanding advantages for the economy, tourism, and quality of living. That
further means that we may follow e.g. example of Italian classification, adopting additional variables
for the classification, which are tailored for local environment. We intend to test different models in
the future research papers.
Finally, it was not originally our intention to devote this paper entirely to the problem of
classification od settlement, but to research many other aspects which the three urban plans
addressed, and the classification was only the first step. Originally, we wanted to focus on urban
morphology and characteristics of blocks, which were atypical, yet well-chosen and adequately
implemented, and which gained the biggest attention among professionals. To our surprise, our
starting point, the identification of type of the settlements in scientific terms, turned out to be much
more complex than we originally expected. Therefore, the further elements of the intended scientific
elaboration of our exhibit will be considered in our future research.
12 PROCEEDINGS OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CONTEMPORARY THEORY AND PRACTICE IN CONSTRUCTION XVI

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper included material owned by the PE Institute of Urban Planning Nish. The first author of
this paper is also the principal author of the abovementioned urban plans and the laureate.
We are in debt to the reviewers who considered that our paper had potential which we did not
recognize ourselves.

FUNDS
This paper was not funded from public funds.

LITERATURE
[1] J. Cvijić, “Balkansko poluostrvo i južnoslovenske zemlje”, Serbia, 1922 .
[2] Spatial plan of the administrative area of the city of Niš 2021, The Official Gazette of the City of Nish, No. 45/11.
[3] Одлукa о неприступању изради стратешке процене утицаја Плана детаљне регулације, локалитета Лалинске појате
у Градској општини Палилула, "Сл. лист града Ниша", бр.127/18.
[4] План детаљне регулације Радикина Бара, на подручју градске општине Нишка Бања на животну средину, "Сл.лист
града Ниша", бр. 112/21.
[5] Catalogue of the 23rd Salon of Urbanism Standard number: , Serbia. [Performance]. Serbian Association of Urban Planners,
2023.
[6] “Geoološke karte Srbije”, [Online]. Available: https://geoliss.mre.gov.rs/vebkarte/igk300.html, 2023.
[7] Закон о планирању и изградњи, „Сл. гласник РС“, бр. 72/2009, 81/2009 - исправка, 64/2010 -одлука УС, 24/2011,
121/2012, 42/2013 - одлука УС, 50/2013 - одлука УС, 98/2013 - одлука УС, 132/2014, 145/2014, 83/2018, 31/19, 37/19 -
др. закон, 9/20 и и 52/202.
[8] V. Cattivelli, “Methods for the identification of urban, rural and peri-urban areas in Europe: An overview”. Journal of Urban
Regeneration and Renewal V, 14(3), 240-246. DOI: 1752-9638, 2021
[9] C. Castillo, et al., “Urban–rural continuum: an overview of their interactions and territorial disparities. Regional Science
Policy &Practice, 15(4), 729-769, 2023.
[10] D. Miłek, “Territorial diversity of availability of public services in Poland”. Wiadomości Statystyczne The Polish Statistician,
63(6), 3956, 2018, doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.0673.
[11] World Bank Serbia, “Sustainable Cities Serbia: Unlocking the transformational potential of cities for the green transition”
Washington:World Bank, 2023 Last Accessed 04/2024
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099102023122572634/pdf/P1761920f790520f10995a0f70d5263bdfd.pdf
[12] V. Cattivelli, “Institutional Methods for the Identification of Urban and Rural Areas—A Review for Italy”, In Smart
And Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions, 2021, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-57764-3_13
[13] S. Salhi, et al. “Spatial Disparities: An Approach to Reveal “Hidden Areas” to Territorial Development in the Marrakech-Safi
Region Morocco”. In Sustainable Development Goals in Europe. Springer, 2023, 2doi:10.1007/978-3-031-21614-5_10
[14] D. Throsby, Economics and culture. Cambridge University Press, 2000, doi:10.1017/CBO9781107590106
[15] A Cataneo, et.al. “Economic and social development along the urban–rural continuum: New opportunities to inform policy”,
World Development, 157, 2022.
[16] “GoogleEarth”(2024)Retrieved from
https://earth.google.com/web/@43.35290736,21.89939341,274.79671463a,36921.0213102d,35y,44.5159012h,60.26304333t,-
0r/data=OgMKATA
[17] R.E. Dickenson, “Rural Settlements in the German Lands” Association of American Geographers, 239-263, 2008 (1949).
[18] PE Institute for Urban Planning, “Annual report 2004”, (2005).