Expansive spatial planning: the new European transnational spatial visions

Spatial planning in Europe has reached new frontiers. The European Spatial Development Perspective covers the entire European Union and, in spite of having an informal, non-binding status, it is creeping into the regulatory frameworks of the European Union. To stimulate cooperation between the Member States of the European Union, including the accession countries, the map of Europe has been divided into a jigsaw puzzle formed by large transnational areas. In three of these areas, spatial visions have been developed. Bearing in mind the enormous spatial diversity in these new European ‘super-regions’ and the great variety in planning systems, it is astonishing that these visions came about in the first place. In this respect they should be welcomed. On the other hand, the way in which they have been prepared could be questioned. Although they contain policy frameworks with an intended impact stretching far beyond the domain of spatial planning, they have basically been written by spatial planners acting alone. And although the mere idea of transnational areas was to a large extent to stimulate novel conceptualizations of the spatial position of countries and regions, the development of spatial concepts has proved to be extremely problematic. This paper looks at spatial visions for three transnational areas: 1) the Central European, Adriatic, Danubian and South Eastern European Space, or CADSES (VISION PLANET); 2) the North Sea Region (NorVision); 3) North-West Europe (NWE Spatial Vision). The analysis of these visions, following a common format, leads to some fundamental conclusions about the various principles on which such visions can be grounded and the architecture of the processes to be followed. The paper aims to contribute to research as well as to policymaking.     

European developments in strategic spatial planning

Strategic spatial planning which takes an integrated approach to the development of a territory seemed to go out of fashion, but now there are signs that it is being re‐established. This paper explores these developments using case studies from 10 European countries. The analysis uses an ‘institutionalist’ approach, which examines how the ‘agency’ of spatial planning practices responds to the ‘structure’ of contextual forces, at the same time influencing that structure. The ‘driving forces’ which are influencing strategic spatial planning are investigated, as are two aspects of the changes in spatial planning: institutional relations and policy agendas. The conclusions are that—at least in the case studies—there is a movement in the institutional relations towards horizontal articulation, territorial logic, and negotiative forms. Policy agendas too are changing, becoming more selective and using new conceptions of space and place. Those institutional developments, however, are not necessarily being translated into territorially‐integrated policy (as distinct from functional/sectoral policy). That translation appears to require simultaneous re‐framing of relational resources (trust, social capital), knowledge resources (intellectual capital), linked to strong mobilization efforts (political capital). The cases considered varied significantly in how far that had been done. Where it had, strategic spatial plan‐making practices were playing a key role in developing institutional territorial integration and re‐invigorating territorial identities.     

The compendium of European spatial planning systems

This paper sets out the context for the production of a European planning systems compendium, which will provide an authoritative and accessible source of information about systems and policies across the European Union.     

European spatial planning reloaded: Considering EU enlargement in theory and practice

The territorial expansion of the European Union (EU) to the new central and eastern European member states raises difficult challenges for European spatial planning. In almost the same manner as structural policy, the conceptual side of European spatial planning has to acknowledge that with enlargement a quantum leap regarding its politics and policy is about to occur. While reflecting on discussions about EU's regional policy and spatial planning on the European level, and sketching a theoretical background, this paper proposes a new way of conceptualizing European spatial planning, taking central and eastern European spatial planning—perhaps as a new epistemic community—into consideration.     

EUROPEAN BRIEFING: Polycentricity in European spatial planning: from an analytical tool to a normative agenda

The notion of polycentricity is gaining widespread currency in both academic and professional debates. It has opened its way in the spatial policy documents of the European Union and member states alike, and has become one of the key components of the integrated spatial development strategy promoted by the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP). Whilst polycentricity is increasingly shaping the spatial policy discourses both in the Commission and in member states, the precise meaning of the term has remained elusive. The first two sections of this article aim to unpack the concept of polycentricity, trace its origin and its development and clarify the confusion over its multiple interpretations at various spatial scales. The third section of the article explains how the concept of polycentricity which has traditionally been used as an analytical tool to explain an existing or emerging reality is now increasingly being used to determine that reality. This is based on the analyses of the use of polycentricity within the European spatial planning framework and in particular the ESDP. Here, the article raises a number of questions regarding the promotion of the polycentric urban regions as one of the ESDP's key policy options for a balanced territorial development across Europe.     

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.     

Industrial policy in the EU: old dilemmas and new options

Industrial policy is highly controversial. Supporters claim it is necessary to address market failures. Critics argue that the danger of government failure is often higher and that such failure may lead to greater welfare loss. The EU justifies its industrial policy by pointing to the existence of transnational problems and to its unique ability to counter them. The EU has the capacity to coordinate national policies, to reduce redundancies, to control and limit national subsidies to industry. It also has a mandate for managing EU foreign trade and competition policy. There are five major industrial policy arenas. Technology policy has been relatively successful in certain fields like telecommunications or traffic‐control systems. In other fields, such as micro‐electronics and computers, the results have been mixed at best. Regional policy has had a limited developmental impact. On foreign‐trade policy, anti‐dumping measures have largely been a failure, though they have stimulated Japanese direct investment. A division of labour between the EU Commission and national, regional and local governments should be advanced with a view to formulating and implementing industrial policy. The regional and local levels should formulate policies aimed at strengthening specialized factors. The EU should concentrate primarily on fostering and shaping new lines of technological development and managing capacity reduction in declining industries.     

A call for a new Japanese foreign policy: the dilemmas of a stakeholder state

Japanese foreign policy is at a crossroads. A global power transition is under way; while the United States remains the leading global power, across the globe non‐western developing states are on the rise. Within Asia, China is a growing presence, wielding expansive claims on islands and maritime rights, and embarking on a defence buildup. As power shifts across Asia and the wider world, the terms of leadership and global governance have become more uncertain. Japan now finds itself asking basic questions about its own identity and strategic goals as a Great Power. Within this changing context, there are three foreign policy approaches available to Japan: (1) a classical realist line of working closely with the US in meeting China's rise and optimizing deep US engagement with China by pursuing a diplomacy focused on counterbalancing and hedging; (2) a transformative pragmatist line of rejuvenating itself through Abenomics and repositioning itself in East Asia; and (3) a liberal international line of pursuing a common agenda of enhancing global liberal‐oriented norms and rules through multilateral institutions along with the United States and the Asia–Pacific countries. Current Japanese foreign policy contains a mix of all three approaches. The article argues that a greater focus on the second and the third lines would enhance the current approach; it would ensure that Japan is more in harmony with the global environment and help it work positively for global and regional stability and prosperity, thus enabling Japan to pursue an ‘honorable place in the world’ (as stated in the preamble to its constitution).     

Towards justice in planning: A reappraisal

The concept of justice is central to a political activity such as planning. This is reflected in the initial influence of consequentialism, particularly utilitarian conceptualizations, in planning thought and more recently in the application of Rawls' notion of “justice as fairness” and Habermas' “discourse ethics”. However, contemporary normative planning theory has been vigorously criticized by studies which take as their starting point the material realities of planning practices. In this paper it is argued that notwithstanding the crucial contributions of Habermas and Rawls to political philosophy their constitutional level conceptualizations were never intended to be applied to the task of situated judgement associated with the highly contested decisions at the heart of the planning activity. Consequently, the issue for the planning community is not so much can the concepts of justice embodied in Rawls' “justice as fairness” or Habermas' “discourse ethics” be found in practice but could they ever. More generally it has been argued that the inevitable abstraction in liberal theories of justice comes so close to idealization that their ability to help individuals and societies to address the question of “what is to be done?” is seriously called in to doubt. This in turn has led to concern that an adequate account of justice should be able to link abstract principles to context sensitive judgement of particular cases. The paper explores some implications of these debates for the future development of theory and practice in planning.     

Milieux innovateurs: Determinants and policy implications

National and regional differences are more and more frequently explained by differences in milieux. This type of explanation raises three questions: Can we identify milieux? What are the determinants of milieux? Are there differences between industries in the matter of determinants of milieux? Most studies on milieux innovateurs are based on case studies and qualitative data. This paper is quantitative and comparative in nature. It attempts to identify milieux and their determinants by using data from the 1999 Statistics Canada Innovation Survey. Based on two synthetic indicators of interactions (weak/strong) and learning (weak/strong), four categories of milieux innovateurs are differentiated which become the dependent variables. In order to see what the determinants of the various milieux innovateurs are and to see in what ways the most favorable milieux innovateurs compare to the others, binomial logit models have been estimated for four industries using the following independent variables: competitive pressures, barriers to knowledge exchange, use of government support, number of employees, collaborative arrangements, R&D activities, regions.     

Towards a mighty union: how to create a democratic European superpower

A strong European Union is needed today more than ever: to act as a reliable partner to the United States, Great Britain and the other great democracies; to deal with the growing threats on her southern and eastern periphery; and most pressingly of all, to deal with the euro sovereign debt crisis. In order to do so, Europeans will have to abandon the gradualist fallacy that union will be achieved in small incremental steps and learn the lesson of history that all successful mergers, such as the British and the American, have been carried out in one fell swoop at a time of extreme crisis. They will have to recognize that the road to unity took a fatal turn when the failure of the European Defence Community caused a bifurcation between politico‐military and economic integration. Today, as we face potential fiscal and economic meltdown and as the external threats to Europe mount, we have another opportunity. We can only seize it, however, if we realize that full European union, if there is to be one, will be an event, not a process. It must follow more or less the American example with a directly elected presidency, a house of representatives elected by population and a senate, which represents the former nation‐states and regions. There is no need for the United Kingdom to be part of this project, but it is essential that both unions work together for the common good. Because the existing political elites are incapable of rising to the occasion—and in many cases are actually antipathetic to it—the task must fall to a new pan‐European party: the Party of Democratic Union.     

The outsiders: the European neighbourhood policy

In May 2004, the European Union acquired not just ten new member states but several new neighbours. At about the same time, it began to flesh out a European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) to bring some order to the EU's relations with its old and new neighbours and to ensure that the newly enlarged EU would be surrounded by a 'ring of friends'. The ENP is also supposed to stave off further enlargement to eastern Europe. However, several problems with the ENP are evident. It requires much of the neighbours and offers only vague incentives in return, making it unlikely that the ENP can meet its core objectives. Furthermore, the ENP is ambiguous about where the EU's borders will end, and it is already apparent that such ambiguity is not helping to foster reform in eastern Europe. Either the EU should say 'no' to further enlargement, so the ENP becomes the framework for relations with the neighbour for the foreseeable future, or it should say 'yes' to eventually letting in a specified number of neighbours which then move out of the ENP.     

Theoretical economic geography and spatial econometrics: dynamic perspectives

Theoretical economic geography has received significant newimpetus from so-called ‘new economic geography’theory, and this provides the basis of the spatial econometricmodel developed in this paper. The model, which is seen as partof an attempt to bridge the gap that presently exists betweenthis new body of theory and reality, is fitted using 3SLS todata on manufacturing productivity growth data for 178 regionsof the EU covering the periods 1975–81, 1981–89,1989–95. The resulting estimates point to the continuedexistence over time of increasing returns, and thus providessupport for one of the main tenets of new economic geographytheory. The results also highlight urbanization, peripherality,the initial level of technology and across-region spilloversas determinants of regional productivity growth variations,operating via the rate of technical progress and labour efficiencyvariations. There is no evidence that these variables are diminishingin significance systematically over time, leading to the conclusionthat spatial polarization in productivity will persist. Thepaper points to the need for further testing of fundamentalassumptions of the underlying theory, and for developments inthe theory to accommodate interdependence between model parametersand the socio-economic context within which the process is operating.     

European Postcolonial Studies and Ireland: Towards a Conversation amongst the Colonized of Europe

In the 1980s, key Irish Studies scholars proposed that Irish culture, politics and economics – both past and present – are most usefully viewed in the context of imperialism, colonialism and anti-colonial nationalism. The result of this intervention is an Irish postcolonial studies which, over the past 35 years, has produced an influential body of scholarship premised on the idea that Ireland is a colony/former colony of the British Empire. Notwithstanding its considerable impact, Irish postcolonial studies has not been without its detractors, with the country's location within Europe forming the basis for one of most persistent objections to the application of a postcolonial framework to Ireland. Given the key role assigned to geography in the postcolonial debate in Ireland, this article explores the implications for Ireland of an emerging postcolonial critique centred on Europe. In addition to discussing the concept of internal colonisation as applied to such Western European countries as Italy and Britain, the article makes reference to postcolonial analyses of the region of Eastern and Central Europe and its relationship with both Russia and Western Europe. The article acknowledges that the branch of European postcolonial studies that focuses on uneven power relationships within and between European countries offers a useful challenge to the argument that Ireland should either be examined within a European framework or a postcolonial one, but argues that the categorisation of a greater number of European societies as colonies or former colonies raises important questions that require further debate.