Strengthening the Polycentric Urban System in Europe: Conclusions from the ESDP

The first European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) document agreed in May 1999 calls for closer cooperation at the EU level in response to the challenges posed by globalization and the increasingly transnational impact of spatial development in Europe. The ESDP maps out a common approach to spatial development in the EU member states and supports an integrated perspective for European spatial development which goes beyond specialist viewpoints. This article focuses on the relationship between key statements on the European urban system contained in the ESDP and the 'real' structures and changes within this urban system. It also examines possible conclusions from the ESDP for urban policy in Europe in the light of the activities already launched to translate the ESDP into practice in the urban dimension of European spatial development.     

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.     

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.     

The Importance of Context and Comparison in the Study of European Spatial Planning

The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) was agreed in 1999 at Potsdam, Germany, as a non-binding framework intended to guide spatially significant policy-making at different spatial scales in order to achieve a more balanced and sustainable growth of the EU territory. This paper develops a conceptualization of the nature of transnational planning frameworks such as the ESDP and presents a framework for the investigation of the application of their policy orientations in the spatial planning systems of European states. It is argued that investigations of the application of transnational spatial development frameworks like the ESDP and the ‘Territorial Agenda of the European Union’ document adopted by EU member states in 2007, need to be sensitized to the diversity of territorial contexts in which these apply, and that a contextualized and comparative approach is therefore essential in evaluating their influence in Europe's varied territories.     

The European Spatial Development Perspective - What Next?

In May 1999, ministers of the Member States of the European Union responsible for spatial planning approved the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP). The document is the product of Member States and the European Commission co-operating on the Committee on Spatial Development (CSD). The ESDP is the work of a small band of European planners. Between them they have succeeded in putting European spatial development on the agenda. This is no mean achievement. However, the visualization of spatial policies in the ESDP is weak. The problem has not been lack of imagination but divergences between European planning traditions. Also, attitudes towards European planning cannot be divorced from those towards European integration. And, even if there was consensus on the 'high politics' involved, planning in the European system of 'multi-level governance' raises difficult issues. The paper proposes strategies, not for 'solving' problems, the solution of which eludes us at present, but for sustaining the momentum. The first evolves around INTERREG II C (soon: INTERREG III B). There should be provisions for teasing out the implications for a future ESDP. Attention should focus on the 'spatial visions' that some programmes include. A Northwest European cluster seems a good point to start with. Another strategy is for the European Commission to make explicit its own views, if necessary specifying where the Commission differs from the Member States. These strategies should provide the impetus for a sustained commitment to the ESDP process.     

Illustrating spatial policies in Europe

The visualisation of spatial policy options through maps and other cartographic illustrations can be very powerful both in the planning process and in communicating the key messages of planning strategies. However, experience from the ‘European Spatial Development Perspective’ (ESDP) shows that visualisation can also be the most difficult aspect in transnational spatial planning processes. This paper explores the potential role of policy maps in communicating spatial policy, and the progress made so far in visualising spatial policies in European spatial planning. It suggests possible reasons for the difficulties on reaching agreement on the form and content of planning policy maps at EU and transnational levels. The paper goes on to discuss theories that might assist in improving performance in the use of cartographic visualisations in European spatial planning. The article concludes by highlighting the need for further research on the communicative potential of cartographic visualisations in European spatial planning.     

Positioning European Spatial Planning

The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) is being described as 'inter-governmental'. The original initiative was for a Community spatial strategy for the delivery of the Structural Funds. Coming from France, it met with opposition. So it was that the successive six-monthly Presidencies of the EU took turns in managing the process. In truth, however, without Commission support the ESDP would not have come about. Now that the ESDP is on the books, the Commission is claiming a leadership role. Taking a position on this, one needs to view spatial planning against the backdrop of general thinking about European integration. Positions in the literature are often presented as polar opposites, like that of 'neo-functionalists' putting faith in integration on the one hand and that of 'realists' emphasizing the continuing dominance of nation states on the other hand. However, a growing body of literature is not about these 'grand theories', but about the actual workings of European institutions. It takes a middle ground and invokes concepts which planning writers are accustomed to, like networks, discourses and governance. From this literature it appears that mutual learning, a feature also of the ESDP process, is common in European integration. European spatial planning must be seen as part and parcel of an emergent system of European multi-level governance. In it, power is exerted at multiple levels of government. Denying the Community a spatial planning role is not realistic, therefore.     

Linking polycentricity concepts to periphery: implications for an integrative Austrian strategic spatial planning practice

This contribution searches for a regional planning conception that allows for a mutual recognition and practical translation between strategies for urban regions and peripheries beyond separate urban and rural categories; taking the Austrian strategic spatial planning context as the example. For this, various notions of polycentricity are discussed and assessed with regard to periphery. The Austrian strategic spatial development concept ÖREK sets out a focused work programme with changing responsibilities and participation of actors. The objectives are targeted and the processes are implementation oriented. Amongst other topics, urban regional issues and peripheral, declining regions are worked on separately. A conceptually integrative, plan-like strategic instrument across the topics and for the whole of Austria is lacking. The ESPON notion of ‘inner peripheries’ is proposed as a complementary concept to the ESDP notion of polycentricity, helping to create a bridge between urban regional and periphery strategies. This has the potential to guide strategic planning practice efforts in Austria towards a yet missing strategic spatial plan for the whole of the country beyond urban and rural categories. Practice relevant conclusions related to the case of Austrian strategic spatial planning are drawn and a need for further, comparative research in a European context is identified.     

Discourses of Mobility and Polycentric Development: A Contested View of European Spatial Planning

This article carries out an analysis of the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), a policy document which represents a critical moment in the emergence of a new discourse of European spatial development. The analytical approach probes at the power relations which have shaped the ESDP framework and its contents, focusing on the twin core themes of spatial mobility and polycentricity. The analysis concludes that in the contested policy process a new spatial discourse of economic competitiveness is emerging at the expense of social and environmental interests. This new discourse will be further contested as implementation takes place in an uncertain policy environment.     

Imagining Rurality in the New Europe and Dilemmas for Spatial Policy

In the discourse on European integration from the mid 1960s until the beginning of the 1990s, rural space and rurality have been traditionally associated with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), while little attention has been devoted to the spatial development of the countryside. These approaches and policies were associated with a 'geographical imagination' of rural space and rurality as a place of production, where the emphasis was on sectoral policies. In Europe today the discourse has changed dramatically. The current dominant geographical imagination of rurality is shifted to consumption and leisure, following both specific structural trends internally to rural areas and the more general post-modern trend away from production per se . These trends are discussed in a highly influential European document, the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) introduced in Leipzig in 1994 and formally adopted in 1999. In this document a new language and new policy guidelines are introduced, which openly support the consumption/leisure imagination, introducing at the same time spatial policies, which will deal more effectively with urban and rural spaces. Bearing this in mind, this article will try first to describe the two phases of imagining rurality in Europe (production versus consumption/leisure) and second their impact on southern European (SE) rural regions.     

The Application of the European Spatial Development Perspective: Evidence from the North-West Metropolitan Area

As a strategic document, the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) wants to be 'applied' rather than 'implemented'. Rather than giving shape to spatial development, application is the shaping of the minds of the actors in spatial development. The latter are not passive recipients of messages. They actively explore options, reinterpreting messages on the way. Conformance of outcomes to intentions cannot be assumed. Application is not a separate phase either. Application includes making new working arrangements and elaborating planning documents to make them fit emergent situations. Judging from the ESDP and from how its ideas are being pursued, its makers are well aware of this. Research into the application of the ESDP in the north-west metropolitan area (NWMA) Interreg IIc programme confirms this. So the ESDP may be anything but a paper tiger.     

Planning for Rural Housing in the Republic of Ireland: From National Spatial Strategies to Development Plans

This paper examines the role of spatial planning as a policy framework for managing rural housing within an integrated territorial development strategy. The paper focuses on the Republic of Ireland, which provides a useful case for analysing spatial planning and rural housing relationships, due to the State's recent shift towards spatial planning (formalized with the publication of the Irish National Spatial Strategy), as well as the level of housing construction that has been observed in an increasingly post-productivist countryside (triggered by counter-urbanization flows, increased affluence and demands for second holiday homes, etc.). The paper reviews all policy instruments that have been used to manage rural housing at various scales (from national strategies to local level development plans). It is argued that while spatial planning adopts an integrative vocabulary, as policy moves down the spatial scale hierarchy, multi-dimensional spatial goals are implemented through traditional, narrow land-use regulation. This often leads to rural housing being addressed in isolation from its wider social and economic context, disconnecting housing from wider rural community issues and ultimately failing to deliver a coordinated and coherent spatial policy for managing rural settlements.     

西方多中心城市区域研究进展

随着经济全球化的发展,城市功能及其边界不断扩张,城市区域日益取代城市成为参与国际竞争的基本单元。多中心城市区域是城市区域发展的新形态,它作为一种空间组织形式或者工具在欧盟的空间规划中得到了应用。目前,关于多中心城市区域的研究已经成为西方城市和区域空间研究的一大热点。经济学、人文地理学、城市规划学等学科都对多中心城市区域进行了研究,研究重点集中在多中心城市区域内涵和定义、多中心城市区域测度方法、多中心城市区域演进,以及多中心城市区域的功能等方面。     

An Insider's Look into Policy Transfer in Transnational Expert Networks

Much of the recent academic literature on spatial planning in Europe focuses on either cross-national comparison of planning frameworks and planning practices or on transnational and transregional initiatives and their impact on planning in European countries. From those publications, it can be gleaned how similar themes are translated differentially in different national contexts. Although it is also a great source of European integration and harmonization, the phenomenon of the knowledge exchange within transnational expert networks of European planners at the level of cities has received less attention. In this paper, the knowledge exchange among planners in such a network is studied, highlighting the role of “transfer agents” (academic and/or policy experts operating in communities in different policy arenas) in the exchange process. It builds on the insights from existing literature on policy transfer and policy learning, and tries to add a new perspective on this body of literature from an insiders' perspective, i.e. participatory observation. The idea is that policy transfer can be fruitfully approached as a process of knowledge and information transfer between producers, senders, facilitators and recipients. Often this exchange is to a very large extent a process of absorbing appealing labels for policy solutions from the international or national policy levels, and then adopting an interpretation of it suitable to one's own context. The authors try to give meaning to this exchange process by using two mechanisms, i.e. social interaction and conceptual replication. By combining these two mechanisms the authors try to uncover which policy lessons are being transferred among seven European cities that joined the expert network on European sustainable urban development (Pegasus).     

Territorial development,planning reform and urban governance: the case of Ireland’s second-tier cities

The increased emphasis within Europe on the role of second-tier cities has implications for the ways in which these urban centres are considered within national spatial planning strategies. In centralized, monocentric states such as Ireland, there has been a general ambivalence towards urban policy for cities outside the capital city, and historically, this has prevented the development of a strong, diversified urban hierarchy undermining prospects for balanced regional development. This paper examines the extent to which a new found emphasis on Ireland’s second-tier cities which emerged in the ‘Gateways’ policy of the National Spatial Strategy was matched by subsequent political and administrative commitment to facilitate the development of these urban centres. Following a discussion of the position of second-tier cities in an international context and a brief overview of recent demographic and economic trends, the paper assesses the relative performance of Ireland’s second-tier cities in influencing development trends, highlighting a comprehensive failure to deliver compact urban growth. In this context, the paper then discusses the implications of current development plans for the second-tier cities and proposals for Irish local government reform for securing compact urban development.     

Regional and transnational spatial planning1: problems today,perspectives for the future

This introductory contribution presents some results of the EURBANET project, dealing with European urban networks in the framework of the INTERREG IIC programme of the North‐western Metropolitan Area (NWMA). This project was conducted between 2000 and 2001 by researchers of Delft University of Technology, the University of Glasgow, the University of Dortmund, the Catholic University of Leuven and the University of Nijmegen. The central objective of the EURBANET project was to explore the role of polynucleated urban regions in the reinforcement of the competitive strength and quality of life in the NWMA, as a contribution to transnational spatial planning in the NWMA. Four polynuclear urban regions are involved: Randstad Holland, the Flemish Diamond, the RheinRuhr Area and Central Scotland (Glasgow‐Edinburgh region). One of the conclusions is that it is necessary to move between scales: from the European Union to national spatial policies (and vice versa), between national policies and regional spatial policies and between regional and urban spatial policies. At each scale, specific demands for spatial planning policies in polynuclear urban regions are becoming increasingly relevant. This is a challenge for spatial policies and policy domains like infrastructure policy, transport policy, housing policy, economic and environmental policy. We present an analysis of how polycentricity has become central to recent discussions on European and north‐west European spatial and economic planning. We launch a spatial network approach to integrate spatial policies. These wide perspectives contrast heavily with the current less satisfactory practice of spatial planning on the level of urban networks and transnational governance.     

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.     

基于GIS的沈阳旧城区叙事空间研究

20世纪60年代,叙事学作为一门学科始于西方历史学、文学领域。直至20世纪末,叙事学开始转向空间领域研究形成空间叙事学,并被逐步应用到城乡规划中,尤其是城乡空间结构等领域。空间叙事学不仅关注城市发展中的物化要素,更加注重物化要素所代表的城市文化和城市记忆等非物化要素的深入挖掘,是探究场所本体与场所精神的重要研究思路。本文从空间叙事学出发,基于GIS平台运用核密度及K函数对古代、近代、现代三个时期沈阳旧城区人工叙事要素和人文事件叙事要素进行点模式量化分析,得出沈阳旧城区叙事空间的总体结构,以及叙事点核、叙事廊道、叙事簇群等叙事空间结构单元,指出沈阳旧城区叙事空间的动态发展性、功能多样性和历史传承性特点,探讨了叙事空间的经济驱动、自然要素、城市定位和交通发展四大演变机制。从人文地理学的视角出发,结合叙事空间理论对沈阳旧城区叙事空间进行分析,结果具有文化地理和城市地理双重属性,丰富了城市研究在该视角下的研究成果。     

Relational complexity and the imaginative power of strategic spatial planning1

This paper explores the imaginations of place and spatial organization and of governance mobilized in recent experiences of strategic spatial planning for urban regions in Europe. Drawing on examples of such experiences, it examines how far these imaginations reflect a relational understanding of spatial dynamics and of governance processes. Spatial imaginations are assessed in terms of the nature of the spatial consciousness expressed in a strategy, the way the multiple scales of the social relations of a place are conceived, and the extent to which relational complexity is understood and reflected in a strategy. Governance imaginations are assessed in terms of how the relation between government and society is imagined, how the tensions between functional/sectoral and territorial principles of policy organization are addressed, and what assumptions are made about the nature and trajectory of transformative processes in governance dynamics. The paper concludes that signs of a recognition of the “relational complexity” of urban and regional dynamics and of territorially-focused governance processes can be found in these experiences, but a relational understanding is weakly-developed and often displaced by more traditional ways of seeing place/space and governance process. The paper concludes with some comments on the challenge of developing a stronger understanding of “relational complexity” within strategic spatial planning endeavours.     

Constructing the European Spatial Development Perspective—For Whom?

This article discusses the provenance and potential significance of the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), considering questions of whose policy is it, who had an input into its preparation, who is the client and/or audience, and the significance of its preparation by the Committee on Spatial Development (CSD). The preparation phase from 1993, and the more public phase from the Noordwijk draft of 1997 to completion of the Potsdam text in 1999 are reviewed in order to consider whether the overall time-scale is reasonable and whether the transnational seminars can be regarded as a form of public participation. The paper goes on to discuss what follows after adoption, threats to its role in EU policy-making, and concludes that there are some benefits from the process of preparation by the CSD, and from the form of élite participation that took place, but that the ESDP must become a Commission policy if it is to play a significance role in achieving territorial and social cohesion at the EU level.