Fractal dimension is an index which can be used to characterize urban areas. The use of the curve of scaling behaviour is less common. However, its shape gives local information about the morphology of the built-up area. This paper suggests a method based on a k-medoid for clustering these curves. It is applied to forty-nine wards of European cities, and shows that the curves add interesting intraward information to our knowledge of the spatial variation of the urban texture. Moreover, morphological similarities are observed between cities: living, architectural, and planning trends are not specific to individual cities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BattyM, 2001, “Generating urban forms from diffusive growth”Environment and Planning A23511–544
2.
BattyM, 2005Cities and Complexity: Understanding Cities with Cellular Automata, Agent-based Models, and Fractals (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
3.
BishopC, 2006Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Springer, Berlin)
4.
ConzenM, 2001, “The study of urban form in the United States”Urban Morphology5(1) 3–14
5.
De KeersmaeckerM LFrankhauserPThomasI, 2003, “Using fractal dimensions to characterize intra-urban diversity: the example of Brussels”Geographical Analysis35310–328
6.
FrankhauserP, 1998a, “The fractal approach: a new tool for the spatial analysis of urban agglomerations”Population4205–240
7.
FrankhauserP, 1998b, “Fractals geometry of urban patterns and their morphogenesis”Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society2127–145
8.
FrankhauserP, 2004, “Comparing the morphology of urban patterns in Europe—a fractal approach”, in European Cities: Insights on Outskirts Eds BorsdorfAZembriP (ESF COST Office, Brussels) pp 79–105
9.
FrankhauserP, 2008, “Fractal geometry for measuring and modelling urban patterns”, in The Dynamics of Complex Urban Systems: An Interdisciplinary Approach Eds AlbeverioSAndreyDGiordanoPVancheriA (Physica, Heidelberg) pp 213–243
10.
GouyetJ F, 1996Physique et Structures Fractales2nd edition (Masson, Paris)
11.
GrassbergerPProcacciaI, 1983, “Measuring the strangeness of a strange attractor”Physica D9189–208
12.
HalleyJHartleySKallimanisAKuninWLennonJSgardelisS, 2004, “Uses and abuses of fractal methodology in ecology”Ecology Letters7254–271
13.
LamNde ColaL, 2002Fractals in Geography (The Blackburn Press, Caldwell, NJ)
14.
LeducAPrairieYBergeronY, 1994, “Fractal dimension estimates of a fragmented landscape: sources of variability”Landscape Ecology9279–286
15.
LevyA, 1999, “Urban morphology and the problem of the modern urban fabric: some questions of research”Urban Morphology32(2) 79–85
TannierCPumainD, 2005, “Fractales et géographie urbaine: aperçu théorique et application pratique”Cybergeo paper 307
20.
ThomasIFrankhauserPDe KeersmaeckerM L, 2007, “Fractal dimension versus density of the built-up surfaces in the periphery of Brussels”Papers in Regional Science86287–307
21.
ThomasIFrankhauserPBiernackiC, 2008a, “The morphology of built-up landscapes in Wallonia, Belgium: a classification using fractal indices”Landscape and Urban Planning8499–115
22.
ThomasITannierCFrankhauserP, 2008b, “Is there a link between fractal dimension and residential choice at a regional level?”Cybergeo paper 413
23.
ThomasIFrankhauserPBadariottiD, 2009, “Comparing the fractality of European neighbourhoods: do national contexts matter?”, paper presented at the ERSA 2009 conference in Lödz and at the ASRDLF 2009 in Clermont Ferrand; copy available from the authors
