Socio-economic potential of cities belonging to the Polish National Cittaslow Network




Polish National Cittaslow Network, socio-economic potential of cities, differentiation of cities


Research background: Modern cities often struggle with the problem of selecting an optimal model of development, which is adjusted to their needs and resources. A kind of response to this was the founding of the Cittaslow network, bringing together cities developing according to the slow city model. The Polish National Cittaslow Network was established in April 2007. The founders of the network were four cities from the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Province (Biskupiec, Bisztynek, Lidzbark Warmiński and Reszel). The aim of the Polish National Cittaslow Network is to promote and spread the idea of good life by implementing in the cities appropriate solutions in the field of environmental policy, infrastructure, quality of urban life, hospitality and social cohesion. Currently, 28 cities belong to the Polish National Cittaslow Network. These cities are joined by a common idea and common goals adopted to improve the quality of the residents' life. However, each city has a different history, tradition, natural values, and also has a different socio-economic potential.

Purpose of the article: The aim of the study was to assess the differentiation of the socio-economic potential of cities belonging to the Polish National Cittaslow Network.

Methods: The research covered all member cities of the network. The synthetic index was used to assess the socio-economic potential of cities. The grouping of cities was carried out using the hierarchical Ward method.

Findings & Value added: Differences in the socio-economic potential of the cities which belong to the Polish National Cittaslow Network are moderate. This is confirmed by the values of the synthetic index of this potential in each of the cities as well as coefficient value of its variation. Differences between the member cities were also verified by the results of grouping. As many as 7 groups were distinguished, including 2 composed of single entities. The conclusions arising from this research are as follows. Firstly, the slow city development model should be individually adapted to the capabilities of each city or group of cities similar to each other in terms of the socio-economic potential level. Secondly, the recommendations proposed in this study can make a useful contribution to discussions on the possible implementation of the slow city model in Poland, and its adaptation by individual cities. Furthermore, the research outcome can serve as a set of recommendations for Cittaslow member cities in other countries.


Download data is not yet available.


Ada, E., & Yener, D. (2017). Evaluation of Cittaslow  Slow City Association within the conservation of landscape potential. Inonu University Journal of Arts and Design, 7(16). doi: 10.16950/iujad.338690.

Balcerzak, A. P., & Pietrzak, M. B. (2017). Digital economy in Visegrad coutnries. Multiple-criteria decision analysis at regional level in the years 2012 and 2015. Journal of Competitiveness, 9(2). doi: 10.7441/joc.2017.02.01.

Baldemir, E., Kaya, F., & Sahin, T.K. (2013). A management strategy within sustainable city context: Cittaslow. Procedia  Social and Behavioral Sciences, 99. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.473.

Bogdański, M. (2012). Socio-economic potential of Polish cities – a regional dimension. Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, 17. doi: 10.2478/v10089-012-0002-8.

Bogdański, M., & Wierzbicka, W. (2014) Socio-economic potential of Polish voivodship cities. Research Papers of Wrocław University of Economics, 334. doi: 10.15611/pn.2014.334.28.

Cheymetova, V. A., & Nazmutdinova, V. N. (2015). Socio-economic potential of the region and its evaluation. Asian Social Science, 11(7). doi: 10.5539/ass.v11 n7p74.

Cittaslow List (2018). Retrieved from content/page/files/246/cittaslow_list_december_2018.pdf (29.01.2019).

Farelnik, E., & Stanowicka, A. (2016). Smart city, slow city and smart slow city as development models of modern cities. Olsztyn Economic Journal, 11(4). doi:10.31648/oej.2938.

Future of cities, cities of the future (2013). Warsow: ThinkTank. Retrieved from (21.03.2020).

Golejewska, A. (2016). A comparative analysis of the socio-economic potential of Polish regions. Studies of the Industrial Geography Commission of the Polish Geographical Society, 30(2).

Grzelak-Kostulska, E., Hołowiecka, B., & Kwiatkowski, G. (2011). Cittaslow international network: an example of a globalization idea? In P. Mácha & T. Drobík (Eds.). The scale of globalization think globally, act locally, change individually in the 21st Century. Ostrava: University of Ostrava.

Hatipoglu, B. (2015). Cittaslow: quality of life and visitor experiences. Tourism Planning & Development, 12(1). doi: 10.1080/21568316.2014.960601.

International Cittaslow Charter (2014). Retrieved from images/PDF/Charter_2014.pdf (15.01.2019).

Janusz, M. (2018). Differences in the standard of living among the populations of the Cittaslow nework towns in Poland. Regional Barometer, 16(3).

Jarocka, M. (2015). The choice of a formula of the data normalization in the comparative analysis of multivariate objects. Economics and Management, 1. doi: 10.12846/j.em.2015.01.08.

Komninos, N. (2009). Intelligent cities: towards interactive and global innovation environments. International Journal of Innovation and Regional Development. 1(4). doi: 10.1504/IJIRD.2009.022726.

Konecka-Szydłowska, B. (2017). Differences in Polish network of Cittaslow towns in the socio-economic aspect. In E. Strzelecka (Ed.). Alternative models of urban development. Cittaslow network. Lodz: Publishing Office of the Lodz University of Technology.

Kopeć, A. (2012). Cittaslow – alternative idea of urban development of small cities. In I.M. Burda, A. Kopeć, & G. Rembarz (Eds.). Urban Energy. Gdansk: Gdansk University of Technology.

Kukuła, K., & Luty, L. (2015). The proposal for the procedure supporting selection of a linear ordering method. Statistical Overview, 52(2).

Local Data Bank (2019). Retrieved from Portret%20terytorium.aspx ( 24.02.2019).

Malina, A. (2004). A multi-dimensional analysis of the spatial differentiation of Poland's economic structure by voivodship. Cracow: Publishing Office of the Cracow University of Economics.

Mayer, H., & Knox, P. (2006). Slow cities: sustainable places in a fast world. Journal of Urban Affairs, 28(4). doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9906.2006.00298.x.

Mierzejewska, L. (2015). Sustainable development of a city: selected theoretical frameworks, concepts and models. Urban Development Issues, 3.

Miłek, D. (2018). Spatial differentiation in the social and economic development level in Poland. Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, 13(3). doi: 10.24136/eq.2018.024.

Myadzelets, A.V. (2009). Modeling of the socio-economic potential of the Siberian Regions with consideration for their economic-geographical position in the National Economic System of the Russian Federation. Mathematical Modeling of Natural Phenomena, 4(5). doi: 10.1051/mmnp/20094511.

Nowak, P. (2018). Regional variety in quality of life in Poland. Oeconomia Copernicana, 9(3). doi: 10.24136/oc.2018.019.

Ozmen, A., & Can, M.C. (2018a). Cittaslow movement from a critical point of view. Planlama, 28(2). doi: 10.14744/planlama.2018.95967.

Ozmen, A., & Can, M.C. (2018b). The urban conservation approach of Cittaslow Yalvaç. Megaron, 13(1). doi: 10.5505/MEGARON.2017.67689 .

Panek, T., & Zwierzchowski J. (2013). Statistical methods of multivariate comparative analysis. Theory and applications. Warsaw: Warsaw School of Economics.

Parysek, J.J. (2007). Urban development and urban governance. Quaestiones Geographicae. 26B.

Radstrom, S. (2011). A place¬ sustaining framework for local urban identity: an introduction and history of Cittaslow. Italian Journal of Planning Practice, 1(1).

Regulations of the Polish National Cittaslow Network (2017). Resolution No. 3/2017 of the Polish National Cittaslow Network dated 20 April 2017.

Roma, G., Fioretti, C., Sampaolo, S., & Coletta, V. (2012). Cittaslow: from Italy to the world international network of cities where living is easy. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

Rysz, K., & Mazurek, K. (2015). Contemporary foundations of the theory of urban development – case study smart, slow and compact city theory. Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, 3(4). doi: 10.1515/environ-2015-0072.

Salieva, G. R. (2016). Cittaslow: fluctuating between improvement and commodification of quality of life. Two case studies: Abbiategrasso and Seferihisar. Milano: Politecnico Di Milano.

Semmens, J., & Freeman, C. (2012). The value of cittaslow as an approach to local sustainable development: a New Zealand perspective. International Planning Studies, 17(4). doi: 10.1080/13563475.2012.726851.

Stawasz, D. (2015). The concept of smart city and an innovative approach to urban governance of public affairs. Economic Service Problems. 121. doi: 10.18276/epu.2015.121-14.

Stawasz, D., & Sikora-Fernandez, D. (2016). The concept of smart city against the background of processes and conditions for the development of modern cities. Lodz: Publishing Office of the University of Lodz.

Strahl, D. (2006). Assessment methods for regional development. Wroclaw: Pulishing Office of the Wroclaw University of Economics.

Strzelecka, E. (2017). Small cities and modern models of urban development. In E. Strzelecka (Ed.). Alternative models of urban development. Cittaslow network. Lodz: Publishing Office of the Lodz University of Technology.

Tayfun A., & Acuner E. (2014). Cittaslow: a comparative research Turkey and the world. Conference of the International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 7(3).

Üstündagli, E., Baybars, M., & Güzeloglu E. B. (2015). Collaborative sustainability: analyzing economic and social outcomes in the context of Cittaslow. Business and Economics Research Journal, 6(1).

Walesiak, M. (2014). Data normalization in multivariate data analysis. An overview and properties. Statistical Overview, 51(4).

Ward, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 58(301).

Zadęcka, E. (2018). Slow city as a local development model. Economic and Regional Studies, 11(3). doi: 10.2478/ers-2018-0027.

Zawadzka, A. K. (2017). Making small towns visible in Europe: the case of cittaslow network – the strategy based on sustainable development. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, Special Issues. doi: 10.24193/tras.SI2017.6.

Zeliaś, A. (Ed.). (2002). Taxonomic analysis for spatial differentiation of Polish standard of living, with a dynamic approach. Cracow: Publishing Office of the Cracow University of Economics.




How to Cite

Wierzbicka, W. (2020). Socio-economic potential of cities belonging to the Polish National Cittaslow Network. Oeconomia Copernicana, 11(1), 203–224.