Key Factors in Restructuring Post-Socialist, Second-Tier European Cities and Their Lessons

Abstract

the 1990s, with large inflows of capital and the restitution of property, real estate markets in many former east bloc countries like Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary began to develop. Capital inflows focused on capitol cities, helping restructure former industrial zones and generating increased prosperity in these firsttier cities. But it was different in the second-tier cities: not only did they receive less attention from international real estate developers and investors, what did develop often failed to yield comparable positive results. In fact, what did develop in many second-tier cities were extensive suburban greenfield sites while problem sites in the core city areas were neglected. This was significantly a result of lack of experience and knowledge about market-based real estate development at (local) government. Using a case study of four second-tier cities in Poland and the Czech Republic, this paper examines pre- and early post-transition urban and real estate development patterns involving greenfields, brownfields, blank spots, network and surface infrastructure in these cities. It compares the patterns in these cities to identify key similarities and differences in how they enhanced or limited further real estate development and discusses the role of local government as it has previously and should in the future address how large-scale urban patterns can be managed to stimulate effective real estate development.