Open Space

Definitions and Values

Definitions of open space—sometimes referred to as greenspace—vary widely, ranging from urban parkland to wilderness areas and water bodies. Most open spaces are largely free of industrial, commercial, and residential development and are readily accessible to the public. Sometimes, that access is simply visual access—as in the case of scenic vistas of privately held, entry-restricted farmland or woodland. Generally, open space is available for various types of active recreational use, and often there are conflicts over the environmental appropriateness of different uses. In the United States, with its extensive areas of open space, environmentalists tend to favor low-impact uses, such as hiking, biking, canoeing, and crosscountry skiing. Conflicts frequently arise over competing demands for recreational uses—with soccer and ball fields, equestrian trails, mountain biking, and off-road vehicles often at the center of controversy. Increasingly, the value of recreational open spaces in combating America's [Page 2093]obesity epidemic is being promoted. Beyond their recreational values, open spaces can act to protect streams and watersheds, provide habitat for flora and fauna, function as corridors and patches in local and regional open-space networks, and sequester carbon.

Several approaches to open-space protection and management are employed.

Regulatory approaches

Open space can be protected very effectively through regulation. Governments can restrict or prohibit development on specific lands while permitting it in places deemed environmentally and otherwise appropriate. Strong regulatory approaches, aimed at concentrating development and limiting sprawl, are especially common in Europe.

In the United States open-space regulation is complex and highly contested, with most of it taking place at the local level, in the form of municipal and county master plans, combined with zoning and subdivision requirements. Open space is preserved, in varying degrees, by local regulatory schemes, as well as market forces that simply do not support development in particular places. State- and regional-level regulatory schemes are less common, though states such as Oregon, with its imposition of urban growth boundaries; Vermont, with its statewide land use regulatory plan; and New York and New Jersey, with regional regulatory plans for the Adirondack Mountains and Pinelands, respectively, are widely viewed as leaders.

...