Search

This paper explores the driving forces behind the promotion of new soft spaces of territorial governance in Denmark at the scale of city regions, the so-called ‘business regions’. We interpret the emergence of business regions as outcomes of the most recent round of reterritorialisation in Denmark, producing new spaces for promoting neoliberal policy agendas of competitiveness, job creation and economic growth. We argue that the business regions should not only be understood as products of neoliberalisation, but also as spaces of neoliberal experimentation, contributing to the normalisation of policy agendas of job creation and business development as taken-for-granted planning objectives. We conclude that the new business regions emerging at the scale of city regions constitute new political spaces for reworking the Danish planning culture in the context of neoliberalism. We suggest that this development can be conceptualised as a ‘businessification’ of strategic spatial planning. This paper explores the driving forces behind the promotion of new soft spaces of territorial governance in Denmark at the scale of city regions, the so-called business regions. We interpret the emergence of business regions as outcomes of the most recent round of reterritorialisation in Denmark, producing new spaces for promoting neoliberal policy agendas of competitiveness, job creation and economic growth. We argue that the business regions should not only be understood as products of neoliberalisation, but also as spaces of neoliberal experimentation, contributing to the normalisation of policy agendas of job creation and business development as taken-for-granted planning objectives. We conclude that the new business regions emerging at the scale of city regions constitute new political spaces for reworking the Danish planning culture in the context of neoliberalism. We suggest that this development can be conceptualised as a ‘businessification’ of strategic spatial planning.

The article presents the essence, goals and instruments of soft (informal, non-statutory) spatial planning, developed in the countries of Western Europe and relatively new in Poland. It targets areas with fuzzy borders (soft spaces) and areas between administration tiers. The article presents conceptual issues and non-formal planning tools used in Western Europe. The planning approaches which are generally described as “soft” are characterised by non-formalised and non-binding procedures, and by their focus on achieving a consensus. In the first part of the article presents the conceptual issues and further informal planning instruments used in Western European countries at different spatial scales The following section presents deficits of spatial planning of metropolitan areas and - against this background - the legitimacy of creating informal plans in Poland, using Metropolia Poznań as an example

Macro-regional cooperation in the EU are networks that use the horizontal and vertical dimension of the multilevel governance system to influence both strategic decision-making as well as implementation activities. Drawing on an analysis of expert interviews in the Danube Region the paper scrutinizes stakeholders’ shared views towards expectations, challenges and added values, and thereby seeks to explain why a trend towards macro-regions arises and for what reasons stakeholders are getting involved. The analysis of the drivers for stakeholders’ commitment in the EU Danube Region Strategy shows that new governance arrangements need to be adjustable to different contexts, allow for negotiation and new network creation whilst simultaneously offering the political ability to act. The evidence presented suggests that multilevel governance in the EU is becoming increasingly complex, embracing more and different types of cooperation, with soft characteristics as crucial elements.

Floodplain areas across the world have always played an attractive role for residential and non-residential developments. The Alpine regions have a strong pressure to develop new residential and non-residential buildings in hazard areas due to lack of other areas suitable for development. Consequently, the number of elements at risk and vulnerability to flood hazards increased. In order to reduce the vulnerability, the focus of mitigation flood hazards was for decades on structural engineering measures with the problem of spatial misfits between the threat and management strategy. Since the late 1990s/early 2000s, Austrian policy makers have been trying to overcome this spatial misfit with the implementation of an inter-local co-operation approach with the use of so-called ‘new spatial planning’ (Heley, 2013) in the planning process. Therefore, the paper examines what the actors and stakeholders are doing in practice and how the concept of fuzziness helps. Although a partnership approach may be seen as a promising solution, in practice there are many limitations and barriers in establishing these collaborations and making them effective (especially in the long term). Rhetoric may not be matched by reality and a ‘partnership’ agenda may bring more problems (i.e. high transactions costs, high risk of failure, uncertainty in the long term) than it solves.

El texto propone una visión de los espacios transfronterizos desde la perspectiva de los soft spaces -los espacios blandos- con relación al planeamiento territorial. Con ella se consigue una interpretación mucho más ajustada de la realidad de las áreas transfronterizas, así como de sus dinámicas. Por otra parte, el artículo hace un repaso a lo que ha sido la cooperación transfronteriza en Europa desde sus orígenes hasta llegar al presente. Partiendo de una coincidencia con otros autores en la definición de fases, se acaba proponiendo que la última, iniciada en 2008, se caracterizaría por la tensión entre las fuerzas que reclaman una recuperación de la frontera y la soberanía de los estados y las que, contrariamente, propugnan recuperar la idea de integración europea perdida en la última década. Es decir, precisamente una tensión entre los soft spaces transfronterizos y un rebordering incipiente. El text proposa una visió dels espais transfronterers des de la perspectiva dels soft spaces -espais tous- en relació amb el planejament territorial. Amb aquesta s'aconsegueix una interpretació molt més ajustada del que són en realitat les àrees transfrontereres així com de les dinàmiques que s'hi produeixen. D'altra banda, l'article fa un repàs del que ha estat la cooperació transfronterera a Europa fins arribar al present. Partint de la coincidència amb altres autors en la definició de fases, s'acaba proposant que l'última, iniciada el 2008, es caracteritzaria per la tensió entre les forces que reclamen una recuperació de la frontera i la sobirania dels estats i les que, contràriament, propugnen recuperar la idea d'integració europea perduda en la darrera dècada. És a dir, precisament una tensió entre els soft spaces transfronterers i un rebordering incipient. This text proposes a vision of cross-border spaces from the perspective of soft spaces in relation to territorial planning. In doing so, we aim to achieve a much more realistic interpretation of cross-border areas, as well as the dynamics that occur in them. The article also examines cross-border cooperation in Europe from its origins to the present. Starting with a definition of phases coinciding with other authors, the article concludes with the proposal of a last one initiated in 2008, which is characterized by the tension between forces that call for the recovery of the border and the sovereignty of the states and those who, on the contrary, advocate recovering the idea of European integration lost in the last decade; that is, a tension between the transboundary soft spaces and an emerging rebordering. Le texte propose une vision des espaces transfrontaliers du point de vue des espaces mous -soft spaces- en relation avec l'aménagement du territoire. Cette vision nous permet de parvenir à une interprétation beaucoup plus fine de ce que sont réellement les zones transfrontalières, ainsi que de la dynamique qui s'y produit. Par ailleurs, l'article passe en revue le rôle de la coopération transfrontalière en Europe jusqu'à présent. Partant de la coïncidence avec d'autres auteurs dans la définition des termes, il finit par proposer une dernière définition, initiée en 2008, qui serait caractérisée par la tension entre les forces qui exigent une récupération de la frontière et la souveraineté des États et celles qui, au contraire, suggèrent de récupérer l'idée d'une intégration européenne perdue au cours de la dernière décennie, c'est-à-dire, précisément, une tension entre les soft spaces transfrontaliers et un rebordering naissant.

Implementing strategic spatial plans is a complex task. The process involves strategy formation, institutional capacity building, funding mechanism establishment and governance arrangements, which take shape within complex power configurations. Based on empirical evidence gathered by interviewing regional planning experts, this paper focuses on the role of governance arrangements and funding mechanisms in current practices of strategic plan implementation in 14 European urban regions. This investigation was completed bearing in mind power configurations, which shape and frame governance arrangements and funding mechanism in planning practice. A cross-case comparison provides evidence that, among the governance arrangements influencing plan implementation, negotiation and interest groups involvement are pivotal. Negotiation involves private interest groups, such as real estate agencies and environmental non-governmental organizations. The paper shows that in some case studies private interest groups have a substantial bargaining power to negotiate, for example, the development of a new housing settlement or a retail facility, while other groups struggle to safeguard natural areas. It is also during negotiations that plan implementation intentions are prioritized, strategic urban projects are formulated and funding mechanisms are established. The paper demonstrates that to truly grasp plan implementation praxis it is necessary to go beyond multi-actor involvement and inter-scalar government cooperation. It is necessary to scrutinize the funding sources, investigate who wins and who loses while negotiations are happening, and how plan implementation decisions are actually made.

Land degradation is becoming a serious environmental issue threatening fertile agricultural soils and other natural resources. There are many driving forces behind land degradation. The expansion of artificial surfaces due to various economic activities, such as housing, industry, and transport infrastructure, known as soil sealing, constitutes one of the most intensive forms of land degradation in urban regions. Measures to halt and reverse land degradation require both strong land-use management policies, as well as effective spatial planning mechanisms. In this regard, strategic spatial planning has been increasingly practised in many urban regions worldwide, as a means to achieve sustainable land-use patterns and to guide the location of development and physical infrastructures. It is reasonable, therefore, to expect that strategic spatial planning can counteract the outlined undesired land degradation effects, specifically those resulting from soil sealing. In this paper, we review strategic spatial planning literature published between 1992 and 2017. The focus is on the phenomena causing land degradation that are addressed by strategic spatial planning literature, as well as on the mechanisms describing the role of strategic spatial planning in land degradation reduction. Results show that sustainable development and environmental concerns have become core objectives of strategic planning in recent years, yet references to the drivers of land degradation are rare. The mechanisms that exist are mainly intended to address environmental issues in general, and are not aimed at reducing particular forms of land degradation. The paper concludes by sketching future research directions, intended to support strategic spatial planning and land-use policymaking related to coping with the global phenomenon of land degradation.

National borders constitute barriers to social, economic and political processes and, thus, tend to contribute to the peripheralisation of border regions. The paper compares the evolution of two euroregions in peripheral central European border regions, whose objective is to overcome such negative border effects by promoting cross-border cooperation at the regional level. On a theoretical level, the paper argues for an understanding of euroregions as soft spaces. Rather than viewing them primarily as instances of state rescaling, the paper emphasizes their role as adaptive service providers for local constituencies. It is suggested that their long-term stability depends on their relation to, and the internal dynamics of, politico-administrative hard spaces at the regional, national, and supranational level. While hard spaces are associated with the notion of the Weberian bureaucratic state, soft spaces combine many of the ideas of the New Public Management literature. Building on an organizational ecology perspective, the paper forwards the argument that stable, resourceful, and accessible hard spaces constitute a predictable and engaging environment within which softer arrangements may compete for the delivery of services. However, the interplay between soft and hard spaces tends to have an impact on the euroregions’ agendas. While EU cohesion policy provides incentives to strengthen horizontal cross-border coordination, the organizational integration of the two euroregions remained rather loose, testifying to the continued importance of domestic prerogatives.

Detractors of European integration and many of its protagonists invoke state territoriality where the social and the spatial come together in a “Territorial-Administrative Complex”. Like the military-industrial complex claiming once to procure security, protagonists claim to guarantee democratic legitimacy. At the same time, the interests of the territorial constituencies prevail over others. The underlying notion of space is absolute and of territory that of a container. Costs and benefits are calculated in terms pertaining to it. The underlying “meta-geography” is one of boxes-in-boxes, but rather than viewing space as a container, based on academic literature in the matter, planners now pursue soft planning for soft spaces. In the face of the apparently incontestable claim of the Territorial-Administrative Complex to a monopoly on the production of democratic legitimacy, the article points out, albeit rare examples of constitutional theorists challenge this monopoly. Voting in territorial constituencies, they claim, has never been properly argued for, making it an arbitrary institution.

A range of new spaces of English planning have emerged in recent years. One new space of clear import is the sub-region. In this paper we seek to gain a better understanding of why sub-regional spaces emerge, how they are used and how planning functions through them. Drawing upon an analysis of three English regions and interviews with actors the paper identifies four types of sub-regional planning that highlight the relationship between accountable, legally sanctioned territorial spaces on the one hand and more informal, open and strategic sub-regional spaces on the other. Sub-regional planning provides an important if not critical strategic parallel to regulatory planning though the relationship between the two is characterised by complexity, contestation, experimentation and impermanence. Among other issues raised by this contemporary reworking of planning is the emergence of an accountability gap through the uncoupling of formal democratic processes embedded within territories and the more diffuse practices of strategic plan making.

This article explores the conditions under which local and regional governments will establish and sustain cross-border co-operation in the fields of police, fire fighting and emergency health services. It argues that understanding this type of cross-border co-operation requires a focus on the way in which professionals define and apply their professional standards in cross-border contexts. Moreover, it requires a focus on individual organizations and professionals working in them, rather than ‘government’ or ‘the state’ as a whole, since cross-border co-operation in these areas typically develops as a result of disparate and unconnected initiatives taken by governmental actors in a given border region. Based on four studies of cross-border co-operation in Dutch border regions, we argue that differences in legal, organizational and cultural backgrounds between the participating countries can be and are overcome by street-level professionals and their organizations, who act as ‘regionauts’ in exploring opportunities for cross-border co-operation. In this type of ‘bottom-up’ cross-border co-operation, motivation among participants is the key to establishing co- operation, and solutions to differences between work routines will be developed along the way. As a result, the establishment of cross-border co-operation often is an experimental, pragmatic enterprise, which is greatly affected by local intra- and inter-organizational dynamics. This opens the potential for pragmatic, flexible and creative solutions. Yet, at the same time it also runs the risk of producing unaccountable cross-border arrangements that are insufficiently embedded in legal and professional safeguards against error and abuse. Keywords Cross-border co-operation, cross-border governance, European Union, professionals, regionauts, soft spaces