Search

City-regional discourses around organisational forms offer little evidence to analyse and guide cooperative processes in a context-specific way. Design criteria can contribute to overcoming this deficit. This paper operationalises a proposed set of design criteria by drawing on the discourses on collaborative governance and land management. Subsequently, these design criteria are used to analyse an ongoing process for the development of a housing development concept in the Leipzig city region and to reflect on the criteria. This contributes to the question of how collaborative governance of land-use development in city regions should be designed. Important points of reference for the design of cooperations are the conscious selection of the actors to be involved and the development of mutual trust between them, joint definition of rules of the game for cooperation, determination of the nature of the emerging institution, orientation of the joint work towards the future and the development of a common understanding of the situation to be improved.

Many metropolitan regions face concerns over sprawling development, increased costs of maintaining infrastructure, and loss of green space and farmland. Some metropolitan regions have intentionally created spatial policies to govern development patterns and manage growth within their region. This paper compares the spatial policies applied in three case studies: the Puget Sound region (Washington State, USA), Metro Vancouver region (British Columbia, Canada) and Stuttgart region (Baden-Württemberg, Germany). While all three regions share a vision that can broadly be summarised as transit-connected communities, each metropolitan planning organisation leverages a variety of spatial policies. Based on the unique planning cultures, various governmental actors take on different roles at the local, county, regional and state levels. This paper categorises and compares the multi-level responsibilities for defining, mapping, and implementing spatial policies. With this focus, the paper provides an international comparative perspective on approaches, context, and contents of multi-level growth management.

Abstract Hamburg participates in the EU-funded research and development project mySMARTlife (mSL) with experiments involving smart city technologies, among others in the field of transportation infrastructure. These experiments are shaped by a public-private consortium in accordance with a call of the EU research and innovation program “Horizon 2020”. They focus on close to the market technologies. The experiments aim at citizen participation. Yet, what technologies are experimented with has been decided and contractually fixed by the consortium beforehand. We explore tensions in this kind of setup, and how entrenched approaches to planning of transportation infrastructure are challenged by new subjectivities, expectations, standards and procedures. From our perspective, it is highly questionable whether a purely expert driven process can produce outcomes that sufficiently reflects local residents’ ideas of sustainable and appropriate changes to urban infrastructures. For this reason, candidate ‘solutions’ for future mobility demands should be exposed to societal deliberation at an earlier stage in their development. Our exploration of (possible) interplays between such an experimental approach to the shaping of infrastructures and the pre-existing integrated approach to planning has been a modest first step, and more empirical research would be needed to draw solid conclusions. It seems worthwhile to analyse more deeply the in- and exclusiveness of the actor constellations in such processes, the role of coincidences or strategies behind the selection of partners, and a possible gate-keeper function of the process initiator.

Rising average temperatures and the increased occurrence of heat islands increase the vulnerability of urban society in Halle (Saale) and Mannheim as well. Dealing with the associated challenges requires not only locally adapted strategies, but in particular an interdepartmental approach and the participatory involvement of those affected. Real laboratories in both cities open up the possibility of testing this in a transformative process. The aim here is, among other things, to learn with and from each other and to generate new knowledge to address the urgent issues. This article discusses the opportunities and challenges that real laboratories are confronted with in terms of knowledge already in the discovery phase and what needs to be taken into account to support this process in the best possible way.

Enterprises and business associations increasingly influence spatial development policies, being a public task in the first place. They develop own plans and positioning strategies, they contribute actively to political decision-making processes or they determine social norms and values. The production of space and place by private actors is not a new phenomenon. What is different, however, is that strategic entrepreneurial decisions are not only focusing on issues which are directly related to the enterprise’s divisions but encompassing urban or city-regional contexts as well as issues that could not directly be linked to a corporate’s business. This article presents selected case studies to analyse the rationales of enterprises, operating at supraregional level, with regard to their (spatial) involvement in local or regional contexts: Do private sector initiated development processes follow business-driven motivations or do enterprises altruistically assume responsibility for the local or regional place? Does this, according to the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility, even allow for speaking of a Corporate Spatial Responsibility? The qualities and spatial implications of the various business-driven strategic approaches will be systemised and evaluated by means of an analytical matrix. It becomes obvious that the entrepreneurial agenda, compared to the public agenda, is not that integrative. Enterprises only pursue social and spatial approaches, if those are not contradicting corporate goals and if they increase the operating income or improve the corporate’s image.

For several years, the Academy for Spatial Research and Planning (ARL) and the Support Group for Spatial and Environmental Research (FRU) have jointly offered a mentoring-programme. The programme aims to increase the proportion of women in senior positions in the field of spatial and environmental planning through supporting young women pursuing careers in both research and practice. The mentoring programme thus serves as a means for the promotion of young talent and gender equality within the ARL. A one-year partnership between a mentee and an experienced mentor serves as the programme’s centrepiece. This article introduces the main targets and contents of the mentoring-programme and, in addition, discusses the results of a survey of mentees and mentors from the last five years. The survey examined motivations for participating in the programme, assessed expectations with regard to the partnership and asked participants to provide an overall evaluation of the programme. The article concludes by offering proposals for the future configuration of mentoring-programmes in research institutions. The authors form the managing committee of the FRU and jointly take the responsibility for the programme.

Policy and practice perspective

Concepts should fulfil different functions in the framework of a strategic spatial development: orientation, co-ordination, reflection, innovation and activation. How can the new “Concepts and Policy Strategies for Spatial Development in Germany” be placed in this respect? The article considers the orientation of the concepts towards growth and the provision of essential services as well as the strategy “reinforcing strengths”, the concentration of metropolitan regions connected with this and the economic orientation of spatial development. Do objective conflicts result with the orientation towards balance and with the overriding concepts of a sustainable spatial development? Which perspectives are offered by the new instrument of “large-scale communities of responsibility”? And with regard to the planning method: How can concept processes guarantee the necessary openness and adaptability? Further-reaching research questions are derived from the discussion.

The article considers the question how the dilemma of many regions can be solved that a conflict exists between the claim for an orientation towards innovation and the necessity of seeking a consensus between the regional actors. Innovation processes and the creation of consensus are two central functions of modern regional development (chapter 2). However, if one considers the logic of innovation and consensus, it becomes clear that both do not necessarily harmonise (chapter 3). The presented approaches for the separation as well as for the alignment of innovation and the finding of consensus structure the field of possible solutions in order to resolve the contradictions (chapter 4). The approaches for solutions can help to organise regional development processes more intelligently and with a greater orientation towards success (chapter 5).

There are very few regions in Germany today where the current discussion on future demographic developments is not being conducted against the backdrop of looming shrinkage or — at the very least — stagnation. With a population of over four million, the Hamburg metropolitan region is, however, one of these rare cases. All the signs here augur growth — both in the core city and in the surrounding area. The absence of any evident symptoms of a serious crisis possibly goes some way to explaining why there currently appear to be no significant impulses to embark on further steps towards consolidation of the region. Although clear progress has been recorded over recent years in respect of co-operation within the Hamburg metropolitan region, structural limits exist which cannot be overcome. This article present a critical appraisal of achievements to date and outlines perspectives for the future development of the Hamburg metropolitan region.

Co-operation has become a buzzword of our times, but it is both costly and conditioned. Based on empirical studies in Baden-Württemberg, Brandenburg, North Rhine-Westphalia and Saxony, it can be shown that regional planners run into difficulties with co-operative approaches: frequently they have to stage-manage co-operation, they are restricted in their selection to those topics which hold the prospect of win-win solutions, can muster only very few co-operands, are ill-equipped to take on the role of initiator, and more often than not are confronted with competing regional actors harnessing the regional willingness to co-operate. From the findings presented, conclusions are drawn as to how planners should improve the situation they find themselves in.

Die Regionalplanung und die Initiative „Südostniedersachsen 2020” zur Erstellung eines Regionalen Entwicklungskonzepts beschreiten neue Wege der Regionalpolitik im Großraum Braunschweig. Sie veranschaulichen damit exemplarisch, wie Elemente des neuen Anforderungsprofils eines Regionalmanagements in der Praxis eingesetzt werden. Gleichzeitig deuten sie an, welchen Herausforderungen sich die regionalen Akteure stellen müssen, wenn dieses planungsmethodische Konzept regional realisiert werden soll.

Angesichts des Bedeutungszuwachses kooperativer Steuerung gesellschaftlicher Prozesse und der „Entdeckung der Region“ entstehen vermehrt intermediäre Organisationen mit dem Ziel, die regionale Entwicklung zu fördern. Sie bewegen sich im Aushandlungsdreieck zwischen Staat, Markt und privaten Akteuren. Das „FORUM für den ländlichen Raum e. V.“ in Nordhessen strebt eine integrierte Entwicklung der Region an. Es veranschaulicht beispielhaft die Chancen und Probleme intermediärer Organisationen: einerseits innovative Impulse als Ergänzung der formalisierten Regionalplanung und Öffnung regionaler Kooperationsvorgänge für bewohnerorientierte Interessengruppen, andererseits Konkurrenzen im bestehenden Institutionennetzwerk und eine abstrakte Regionalarbeit, die sichtbare Ergebnisse kaum zuläßt.

Climatic and ecological changes across the globe represent a challenge for humanity that can only be solved through a great transformation, that is, a widespread shift toward sustainable spatial development. This means addressing transformation needs in all systems to recognize that civil society, economies and politics are all predetermined by planetary boundaries. This transformation demands that the fields of applied spatial science and spatial planning identify strategies and solutions. This paper examines the extent to which these topics are already being addressed by the university-level spatial studies programs currently training future planners. It develops and examines criteria for evaluating these programs using guideline-based interviews and literature research to perform detailed analysis of selected programs. The study demonstrates that not only specialist knowledge, but also personal and methodological skills are crucial to the success for far-reaching change processes and, ultimately, a society-wide paradigm shift. In some cases, these skills are already being addressed by individual spatial studies programs, especially planning programs. However, there remains a need to accelerate the cultivation of independent learning skills and collaboration in inter- and transdisciplinary teams. Accordingly, this paper proposes a differentiated view of teaching and learning formats in higher education and encourages deepening the focus of spatial studies programs on sustainability and transformation issues.