Search

This paper discusses the future challenges of strategic spatial planning in Europe in the coming decades. The paper argues that one of the core challenges for strategic spatial planning is to regain its political legitimacy. Strategic spatial planning has increasingly lost its political support after the global financial crisis in 2007–2008 and a decade of austerity policies. Strategic spatial planning must make itself relevant again by addressing the most prominent challenges for contemporary urban areas, such as the current energy crisis. The energy crisis has demonstrated the need for an even faster transition to renewable energy sources, which requires large areas for energy infrastructures on land. The paper argues that strategic spatial planning could play an important future role in supporting the sustainable energy transition by identifying appropriate spaces of production and building support for such production facilities among local communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question, “what is territorial cohesion” has reverberated through European spatial policy since the publication of the European Spatial Development Perspective in 1999. Over the last 10 years, the European Spatial Policy Observation Network (ESPON) has made many efforts to define and measure the concept of “territorial cohesion”. Many such attempts assume that a policy concept must be defined in order to be “operationalized”. Or, in other words, that we must determine what the concept is before we can determine what it can or should do. This paper challenges this assumption in two parts. In the first, I review a number of ESPON projects to show how complex and uncertain these essentialist definitions have become. In the second, I analyse a number of national, regional and local government responses to the 2008 Green paper. I show that, whilst a clear and coherent definition has not been established, this concept is already operationalized in different policy frameworks. Bringing this together, I argue that users of such concepts ought to approach the issue differently, through a pragmatic line of enquiry: one that asks what territorial cohesion does, what it might do and how it might affect what other concepts, practices and materials do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Territorial, economic and social cohesion in European Union (EU) regions are major challenges that regional policies are aimed at. These policies have a strong focus on innovation-driven models as key processes for reducing disparities and promoting regional development. Since the 1980s, innovation and technology policies have gained momentum and legitimacy to stimulate multiple development patterns and growth models, mainly from national economic dynamics to well performing regional systems. Theories of knowledge and learning have been developed in more successful places, producing concepts that seem unattainable for less successful ones. Given that less developed regions have been overlooked in innovation studies, this paper reviews the literature on territorial innovation models in Europe in order to understand theoretical and practical gaps for these regions and to identify trends that support the need to redirect conceptual, political and instrumental attention of territorial innovation systems. It debates the different forms of innovation in regions, the variety and role of actors, the quest for geographical and place-based resources, the determinants for innovation and the 'how' and 'for what' demands of regional development. The discussion anticipates critical questions that try to promote a 'normative turn' in innovation policy, propose research avenues and discuss policy implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rural regions are considered a key element to allow a shift towards sustainable development. However, to what extent they are able to innovate and how they integrate into interactive innovation processes considering their distance from urban centres remains unclear. By drawing on 15 case studies of interactive innovation in agriculture and rural development in a variety of rural regions across Europe, and combining a rural-urban typology with data on the quality of AKIS (Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems), four classes of ruralities were defined. In them, the innovation process was analysed by paying special attention to the analytical aspects of: (i) organizational structure; (ii) initial idea; (iii) finance; (iv) access to extraregional resources. The results show that innovation in more rural regions is often inspired by external ideas, while drawing on already well-established networks. Rural entrepreneurs as individual actors drive innovation, but struggle in 'thin' environments with little support and scarce private funding. The private sector can buffer lack of AKIS support, but embedded NGOs and producers' organizations act as last resorts in more remote regions. The study contributes to a profounder understanding of how rurality impacts innovation processes, offering an analytical framework for future rurality studies and policy interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Periods of ongoing growth in the economy and demographics have come to a halt for many European regions for various reasons, challenging their economic development prospects. Despite the heterogeneous nature of stagnation, decline, peripheralization or even stigmatization to be found there, these configurations ‘beyond growth’ have in common that short-term ‘fire-fighting’ policy approaches aiming to foster regional economic growth face some important limitations. We argue that this has to do, among other things, with the overall direction of established and orthodox planning approaches that are predominantly based on growth-oriented paradigms and implicitly or explicitly work with dichotomous categories such as core–periphery and metropolitan versus non-metropolitan spaces; these do, however, not capture local realities in these cases. Using the notion of non-core regions, we plead for conceptualizing non-core regions and their regional economic development trajectories in different ways: thinking ‘beyond growth’. Such alternative ideas should be informed by alternative understandings of growth, development and sustainability in order to influence theories and concepts, but also to support new approaches to planning practice. To this aim, we discuss non-core regions from a social constructivist perspective, elaborating some points of departure for conceptualizing and practising regional planning ‘beyond growth’. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article discusses the creative and cultural policies that are developed on a European cross-border scale. It provides a comparative case study of the Pyrenees-Mediterranean Euroregion, located on the French–Spanish eastern border and the Greater Region between Luxembourg, Germany, Belgium and France. The analysis is based on the concept of cultural development, which is related to Euroregions to emphasize the uses of culture, identity and creative resources in strategies of territorial attractiveness and institutional capacity-building. The analysis then shows how the dynamics of cultural development concretely impact Euroregional policies: implications, or even strengthening, of arts and creativity in cross-cutting policies—tourism and sustainable development, promotion of cultural diversity and the human dimension of development. Furthermore, these dynamics underline the contribution of cultural policy to the construction of territoriality, and subsequently the contribution of Euroregions to the territorial and cultural construction of Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]