The decline in the role of agriculture as the basis for the livelihood of rural residents has led to the development of new directions for rural transformation. In Poland, the concept of multifunctional development has gained the most popularity. However, it does not have a defined spatial development model. There has also been no research into how the development of non-agricultural functions affects spatial development and to what extent this development is sustainable. Therefore, the aim of this study is to show and compare the changes that have taken place over the last 40-50 years in the spatial arrangements of development in traditional agricultural villages and in villages with different non-agricultural functions (tourist, industrial, and service functions). At the same time, we want to indicate which of these functions have contributed to the development of the most sustainable spatial arrangements. To this end, we selected three indicators of sustainable development of rural space: compactness of buildings, continuation of traditional rural layouts, and availability of services, and then carried out an analysis of changes in these indicators on the basis of archival and current cartographic materials and data on service facilities. We conducted the research for four municipalities in eastern Poland (50 villages). The results indicate the predominance of negative spatial phenomena such as the deterioration of the accessibility of services and spatial development contrary to historical spatial layouts. There is a spillover of development in the form of discontinuous, chaotic clusters of buildings often having the character of suburbia and, consequently, the disappearance of village centres, worsening walkability, and blurring of village boundaries. The only positive change is an increase in the compactness of buildings-mainly in villages that previously had a dispersed character. It is difficult to identify village functions that would unequivocally favour spatial sustainability. The service villages showed slight advantages in terms of social (availability of services) and environmental (compactness of buildings) factors. In contrast, the development of agricultural villages was more favourable in cultural terms (traditional village layouts). In all aspects, negative changes were recorded in industrial villages and (the worst results) in tourist villages. However, the trends were similar in all municipalities, which draws attention primarily to the lack of a rational spatial policy related to multifunctional village development.
