Serbian Spatial Planning among Styles of Spatial Planning in Europe

The classification of spatial planning styles in Europe has been successively reviewed a few times. Most recently, it has been done in the framework of the European Spatial Planning Observatories Network (ESPON) 2.3.2 project dealing with the territorial governance. Based on national overviews for 29 European countries, this project uses the classification of spatial planning systems in four styles: comprehensive-integrated, regional-economic, land-use and urbanism. This study did not take into account the spatial planning system in Serbia since it is neither in the European Union nor a member of the ESPON similar to Norway and Switzerland. This article uses the form of national overviews elaborated for the ESPON project and puts Serbia in a comparative spatial planning perspective, classifying it between the comprehensive-integrated and land-use planning styles.     

Planning Small Regions in a Larger Europe: Spatial Planning as a Learning Process for Sustainable Local Development

An enlarged Europe is addressing the challenge of territorial cohesion on the basis of a disciplinary and operative framework formed by a number of evolving documents and provisions to be applied and developed at different administrative and planning levels. Rapid and profound changes have occurred in previous decades as far as institutional framework, the role of actors and issues to be tackled are concerned, within a re-scaling process of territorial governance. In this context, small territories can take advantage of European funds, but experience a hard confrontation with the market economy and supra-local visions, use of resources and infrastructure projects. A decisive role, in many countries, has been gained by regional authorities, which must mediate among various territorial levels, institutions and actors involved in a multilevel governance process. The paper focuses on spatial and regional/territorial planning processes among the European dimension, Member States and regions, on the basis of a case study conducted in Northern Italy. The aim is to determine the role of European spatial planning as a “learning machine” [Faludi, A. (2008) European Territorial Cooperation and Learning, disP 172, (1/2008), pp. 3–10.] able to support processes of mutual learning and cooperation, overcoming the attitude of compliance to upper level schemes and financial programmes rather than innovating usual procedures and territorial planning.     

European cross-scale spatial planning and territorial frames in the Italian Median Macroregion

This article describes the preliminary outcome of interdisciplinary research that arises from a study by the Italian Ministry of Infrastructures and Transport and the Abruzzo Region (IT) on local development processes in central Italy, and specifically in the Median Macroregion, whose results have been extended to European context. It concerns the European spatial planning, specifically the study of an original interpretative model of European space, called Territorial Frames – TFs, a particular multi-scale infrastructural mesh that connects the ‘local’ territories with ‘global’ ones and that can represent the activating element of processes and policies of spatial development of settlements, of processes of valorization of the productive, naturalistic and landscape sectors. This new model interfaces with the territorial reticular component through the concept of polycentrism, also projecting evolution, and with that of the governance of development projects, using the potential of European Macroregions. The main objective of the research is to feed the topic of spatial planning, oriented to the integration between territories through a cross-scale approach, and to the activation of new processes of sustainable territorial development, with reference to the economically disadvantaged inner areas in a context of Macroregional governance.     

From smart growth to European spatial planning: a new paradigm for EU cohesion policy post-2020

Formally initiated in 1989, European Union (EU) cohesion policy (ECP) has since passed through a series of metamorphoses, along its five programming periods, while becoming the most financed EU policy. As its name indicates, its initial goals were earmarked for promoting economic and social cohesion, following the intentions expressed in the Single European Act. Since then, from a policy strategy intervention point of view, ECP has shifted into a financial tool to promote investment for growth and jobs. In the meantime, European spatial planning (ESP), which had its debating pinnacle with the release of the European Spatial Development Perspective, by 1999, has declined in interest and narrowed into a novel notion of Territorial Cohesion. In this challenging context, this article analyses the implementation and main impacts of ECP and proposes a new strategic paradigm, built around a novel ‘ESP’ vision, backed by the main pillars and dimensions of territorial development and cohesion. More particularly, we suggest that the current rationale for a smart, sustainable and inclusive growth could instead fuel an alternative strategic design based on a cohesive and sustainable development vision: green economy, balanced territory, good governance and social cohesion.     

The Engagement of Territorial Knowledge Communities with European Spatial Planning and the Territorial Cohesion Debate: A Baltic Perspective

Abstract

Recent, dramatic spatial development trends have contributed to the consolidation of a unique territorial governance landscape in the Baltic States. The paper examines the transformation of this evolving institutional landscape for planning practice and knowledge, which has been marked by the disintegration of Soviet institutions and networks, the transition to a market-based economy and the process of accession to the EU. It explores the evolution of territorial knowledge channels in the Baltic States, and the extent and nature of the engagement of actors' communities with the main knowledge arenas and resources of European spatial planning (ESP). The paper concludes that recent shifts in the evolution of these channels suggest the engagement of ESP has concentrated among epistemic communities at State and trans-national levels of territorial governance. The limited policy coordination across a broader spectrum of diverse actors is compounded by institutionally weak and fragmented professional communities of practice, fragmented government structures and marginalized advocacy coalitions.     

Spatial Units for EU Territorial Governance: Findings From a Study on North-Western Italy

This article explores the possibility of identifying spatial units that are more suitable to manage the European Union territorial governance process than the traditional administrative districts or crude statistical partitions. To this purpose, the article presents a study on North-Western Italy, which the author has developed recently in the framework of a research project promoted by the Italian Ministry of Infrastructures to prepare a spatial vision for the Italian National Strategic Reference Framework under the EU cohesion policy 2007–2013. While updating the reader on the Italian approach to EU cohesion policy and on developments in this area, the article particularly draws the attention of European planners to the concept of “Interdependent Territorial Systems” as spatial units contributing to combine the relevant dimensions of EU territorial governance in a proactive planning process.     

Towards a European spatial planning policy: Theoretical dilemmas and institutional implications

This article examines the emergence, the present configuration and the perspectives of a spatial planning policy at a European level in the light of the institutional and economic properties embodied in the nature of the European integration process. First, it recapitulates the main historical steps through which the idea of a European view about spatial questions has been developed as a combined result of cohesion and solidarity objectives and liberal market constraints. On the basis of these complementary and competitive principles, the article explores the conceptual identity of the emerging policy and discusses especially the reorientations of the spatial justice concept under a market integration paradigm. Finally, it presents the fundamental traits for the institutional design of the new policy, which lead to the reshaping of the traditional hierarchical, substantialist and normative profile of welfare spatial intervention towards an horizontal, procedural and pluralist model of collective spatial coordination. The article comes to the conclusion that the conceptual and institutional innovations to which the emergence of a European spatial planning policy is submitted constitute a part of a more general rearrangement in the legitimation basis of public policies in a post‐national and post‐welfare Europe. Recognition of these transformations could be seen both as a search for new forms of governance beyond the state and as a chance for rethinking traditional concepts of social theory in a time of change.     

The Rise of Territorial Governance in European Policy

The notion of territorial governance has relatively recently emerged onto the European policy agenda, and often used in relation to the concept of territorial cohesion. To date, the notion has been understood and conceptualized in various ways and has been defined rather loosely when invoked. This paper examines how the notion is used and understood in European policy debates. It questions whether the notion is different to general concepts of governance and multi-level governance. Three specific characteristics are suggested that might distinguish territorial governance from other types of governance: (i) managing territorial dynamics, (ii) assessing territorial impacts and (iii) delineating policy boundaries.     

New Spatial Patterns and Territorial–Administrative Structures in the European Union: Reflections on Eastern Europe

Abstract

Spatial patterns and territorial–administrative structures in Eastern Europe are a mix of historical?territorial path-dependencies influenced by the current path-creating policies. Since the early 2000s, the European Union (EU) policies, practices and challenges have concerned also Eastern Europe. This article discusses spatial patterns and territorial–administrative structures in theory, illustrates their practices and presents scenarios for their future in the EU contexts. The Europeanization of spatial policy and planning and the territorial–administrative structure harmonization are the key current trends. The transposition and implementation of the EU spatial policy mechanisms and practices in Eastern Europe are influenced by contextual path-dependent legacies and the uncertain long-term future of the EU. Conditionality as governmentality and relational regions open new perspectives to territorial dynamics in the EU and Eastern Europe.     

The Practice of Participatory Planning at Mapoon Aboriginal Settlement: Towards Community Control,Ownership and Autonomy

The practice of participatory planning in discrete Indigenous settlements has been established since the early 1990s. In addition to technical and economic goals, participatory planning also seeks community development outcomes, including community control, ownership and autonomy. This paper presents an evaluation of one such planning project, conducted at Mapoon in 1995. The Plan successfully improved physical infrastructure and housing, but had mixed success in terms of community development. Despite various efforts to follow participatory processes, the Plan was essentially a passing event, community control progressively diminished after its completion, and outcomes fell short of notions of ownership and autonomy. This suggests some misunderstandings between the practice of participatory planning and the workings of governance.     

The European spatial development perspective and North‐West Europe: application and the future1

The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) is the product of a north‐west European planning tradition. This article discusses the role of north‐west European concerns, in particular the use of the concept of polycentricity, in the making of the ESDP, and the application of the ESDP in the North‐west European Metropolitan Area (NWMA), more in particular in Germany, the UK, The Netherlands and Belgium. The article also explores the future of spatial planning as regards north‐west Europe. Much will depend on how Community policy will adapt to the enlargement of the European Union. However, it seems certain that existing member states, in particular those in north‐west Europe will see their share in the structural funds evaporate. This may give added significance to INTERREG IIIB respectively to the successor of this Community Initiative. In addition, concepts like territorial cohesion and territorial management may become functional equivalents to that of spatial planning, for which the Community is said to have no competence.     

IS THERE A NEW ‘TRUST’ IN INNER SCANDINAVIA? EVIDENCE FROM CROSS‐BORDER PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE

Inner Scandinavia is one of the Swedish‐Norwegian INTERREG‐A three sub‐programmes, and has been working in operationalizing cross‐border projects in the border area since 1994. To date, several cross‐border strategies have been implemented, one for each programming period of the INTERREG‐A programme. This article investigates whether these strategies can be regarded as a type of cross‐border planning mechanism in promoting territorial development of the border region. It does so by developing a typology, which captures the essentials of spatial planning, against the background of which the article also analyses Inner Scandinavia governance structures, which involves a whole set of interconnected territorial partnerships between five border counties: Hedmark, Østfold, Akershus (Norway), Värmland and Dalarna (Sweden). Here, the main goal is to see if the Inner Scandinavia governance structure, which was recently altered by the inclusion of the Hedmark–Dalarna cross‐border committee, also known as TRUST, is favourable to the implementation of a genuine and long‐term cross‐border spatial plan, with the ultimate goal of reducing the barrier effect and improving the territorial capital along the cross‐border region. Project dokuments and interviews indicate that the existing cross‐border governance model in Inner Scandinavia, led by the INTERREG‐A Steering Committee, produced substantial progresses in reducing the barrier effect, in all its dimensions, and in supporting the territorial development across the border area. Consequently, the role of other cross‐border governance structures should be confined to promoting the active involvement and mobilization of local and regional actors in the cross‐border cooperation process, and in implementing several cross‐border projects with local/regional significance.     

Class,Community and Communicative Planning: Urban Redevelopment at King's Cross,London

Abstract: This paper presents an argument for considering issues of class in analyses of communicative planning projects. In these projects, class interests tend to be obscured by the contemporary preoccupation with the class‐ambiguous category of “community”. Through a case study of a project of urban redevelopment at King's Cross in London, we conceptualize and map class interests in an urban redevelopment project. Three aspects of the planning process that contain clear class effects are looked at: the amount of office space, the flexibility of plans, and the appropriation of the urban environment as exchange or use value. These aspects structure the urban redevelopment but are external to the communicative planning process. The opposition to the redevelopment has in the planning discourse been articulated as “community”‐based rather than in class‐sensitive terms. We finally present three strategies for reinserting issues of class into planning theory and practice.     

Towards a Framework for Cooperation: Spatial Public Diplomacy on the Island of Ireland

Abstract

European spatial planning arguments advocate a blend of strategic thinking, coordination and related initiatives to promote and secure territorial cohesion. These ambitions embrace a set of normative agendas around economic, social and environmental convergence, competitiveness, policy coordination and efficient infrastructure provision across space. In practice, territorial management then involves devising interventions across inter-connecting scales of governance which comprise complex agency relations, differentiated places and defined communities. In transnational contexts, attempts to foster appropriate spatial governance arrangements and relations across sovereign borders necessitate re-crafting planning and development cultures and service delivery practices to advance territorial cohesion. Transnational working necessarily involves cooperation across an extended range of institutions, interests, influences and potential actors. This paper examines attempts to secure bi-lateral commitment to a joint planning framework for the two distinct territories on the island of Ireland. Specifically, it traces the formal and informal activities involved in the development of the 2013 Framework for Cooperation between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. Informed by ideas of cross-border regionalism, it discusses the necessary spatial public diplomacy involved in the social reconstruction of strategic spatial planning to improve policy coordination and cross-border working.     

Strategic Spatial Planning: Collective Action and Moments of Opportunity

The theory and practice of strategic spatial planning makes a significant contribution to debates about contemporary European planning. Whilst its proponents describe a progressive style of governance and new territorial imaginations it is difficult to point to success on the ground. The paper argues that the normative conception of strategic spatial planning and focus on the failure of planners to live up to the ideal diverts attention from understanding the day-to-day work of planners and the ordinary politics of planning. We review some potentially helpful work in political sociology to develop framework that, rather than seeing planners failing to develop appropriate spatial and governance imaginations, may contribute to a better understanding of how planners pursue interests, attempt to manage the costs of collective action and assess institutional constraints and political opportunities.     

European Union Competition Policy and the European Territorial Cohesion Agenda: An Impossible Reconciliation? State Aid Rules and Public Service Liberalization through the European Spatial Planning Lens

The territorial and spatial planning impacts of European Union (EU) economic and competition policies have remained under-researched in the field of European spatial planning, in contrast to other EU policy fields. This briefing explores how two elements of the EU competition policy, the regulation of “state aid” and the liberalization of “services of general interest (SGI)”, have significant implications for the pursuit of the objective of territorial cohesion through spatial planning and territorial development policies at different scales. The paper first reviews the development of the concept of territorial cohesion in the EU discourse and policy agenda since the mid-1990s, as well as the contribution of public services (Services of General Interest, or SGI in EU jargon) to it. It, then, reviews how the EU state aid rules and liberalization policies affect the state's ability to intervene (i) in support of sub-national territories which are lagging behind or suffering decline, and (ii) in the provision of public services across the national territory, specifically in peripheral regions or areas where the provision is not catered for by the market. The conclusion of the paper outlines the additional challenges to the pursuit of territorial cohesion in the EU posed by the post-2008 economic crisis and suggests avenues for future research.     

The Politics of Spatial Policy and Governance in Post-1990 Hungary: The Interplay Between European and National Discourses of Space

There is now a wealth of literature discussing how regional development and spatial planning practices in Central Eastern Europe have been shaped through the alignment with EU policy frameworks. However, scholars have tended to study governance dynamics in terms of adaptation and learning, paying thus little attention to how spatial policy change is inherently interlinked with the political contestation of nation-state spaces. This paper proposes to address this lack by combining insights from political economic work on state spatial restructuring and discourse theory. From this perspective, the institutionalization of spatial policies is examined as a political process in which particular understandings of space become seen legitimate and stabilized depending on how well they fit existing discourses. The paper demonstrates the added value of this approach through a case study of spatial policy change in post-1990 Hungary, and argues that the approach is more generally applicable to examine shifts in spatial policies and to address concerns with the increase in uneven development at different scales.     

Europe exposed: mapping the impacts of EU policies on spatial planning in the Netherlands

National laws, local traditions and practices largely define which spatial planning policies are pursued and how they are carried out. Still, like many other policy areas, an unmistakeable process of Europeanization is underway in planning. On the one hand, informal bottom-up Europeanization is occurring through the increasing interaction between scholars and practitioners and by the growing body of spatial information and analyses available at the European Union (EU) level. On the other hand, formal top-down Europeanization occurs when EU policies – competition, economic development, agriculture, nature protection, air quality, etc. – impact domestic spatial planning systems, policy and practice. In this study, we investigate this second kind of Europeanization, using the case of the Netherlands as an example. Specifically, we construct a map revealing the location of EU sectoral policy using six distinct impact types. We observed that many policies overlap and various inter-sectoral tensions (horizontal coordination) are present. The empirical analysis moreover revealed, in line with recent theoretical literature on multilevel governance, that domestic policies and practices, particularly at the national level, determine the way European policies affect planning. This finding has implications for all member states, but particularly those whose national planning is undergoing fundamental reform.     

Tracing resident antagonisms in urban development: agonistic pluralism and participatory planning

This article draws on research with resident action groups and other alliances in Sydney. It investigates the ways in which citizens work beyond the formal planning system to approach and achieve their urban development goals. The post‐political treatment of community voices in planning relies on the centrality of consensus politics in current participatory planning regimes. By providing a democratic outlet that is far removed from the actual development outcome, powerful urban actors can silence through inclusion. Planning theorists have posited that one pathway beyond this post‐political moment in urban planning is provided by Chantal Mouffe's critique of Habermasian communicative theory and consensus politics, which she bases on her theory of agonistic pluralism. Following Mouffe, to achieve a productive agonistic politics, any rigid antagonisms between “enemies” need to be moderated to more mutable “adversarial” positions. However, we have little knowledge of the conditions that might precipitate such a change in praxis. To address this gap between theory and praxis, we use focus group data to show how local resident action groups and urban alliances work through three modalities of antagonism to achieve their urban development goals. We add empirical weight to the idea that citizens can shift from rigid and fundamental antagonisms to the potentially more productive adversarial politics of agonistic pluralism but therein expose some limitations with how Mouffe's ideas are being applied to urban planning.     

Investigating the partnership approach in the EU Urban Agenda from the perspective of soft planning

At the European level, several strategic documents concerned with spatial and urban development have been published during the last decades. While these documents are essential to communicate European ideas and objectives, they are often regarded least influential in practice due to their abstract nature, legally non-binding status and lack of allocated resources. Though these limitations apply to the EU Urban Agenda, this recently published policy paper introduces partnerships as a new implementation tool. The partnerships can be regarded as innovative in two respects: On the one hand, they involve new actors, most importantly cities, in European policy debates. On the other hand, they ensure the anchorage of the Urban Agenda with a broad range of actors at various spatial scales without challenging its legally non-binding status. The Urban Agenda can thus be understood as another example of the move towards soft European spatial planning and urban development. This article investigates the notion of partnership as a soft planning and governance tool within the Urban Agenda. Moreover, based on expert interviews, it presents early opinions and expectations of actors involved in the development of the Urban Agenda and the partnerships on affordable housing.