Territorial Cohesion in the Context of Interregional and Transnational Cooperation

Axel Stein

doi:10.2478/v10105-010-0001-9

Authors

Axel Stein Leibniz Institute for Regional Development and Structural Planning (IRS), Dept. 1. Regionalisation and Economic Spaces, Flakenstraße 28–31, 15537 Erkner, Germany

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2478/v10105-010-0001-9

Keywords:

EU, territorial cohesion, integrative planning

Abstract

Territorial cohesion can be traced back to the making of the European Spatial Development Perspective. Therefore, the experience gained with the application of this ‘mother document’ (Faludi in Krupa et al., 2008, p. 14) of integrative planning in Europe can contribute to the specification of territorial cohesion.

This paper draws on experience from the Interreg IIIC project ProgreSDEC, covering local and regional authorities from Greece, Italy, and Spain cooperating with each other in interregional and transnational projects. It looks both at the vertical and horizontal dimensions of European integration and explains three aspects of territorial cohesion. Talking about growing awareness, it should be differentiated between awareness relating to European issues – such as the European territorial and institutional environment – to the quality of planning, and to the endogenous ‘territorial capital’. Key terms of European integrative planning are interpreted differently. The paper discusses the reading of ‘polycentricity’, ‘landscape’, and ‘governance’, in particular. Territorial governance can be looked at as an institutional approach to develop integrative planning in the context of territorial cohesion. This notably turns the attention to regions as the focus of integration, in terms of balancing sectoral approaches, bundling spacious networks, and handling the demands from different levels.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

BÖHME, K. and SCHÖN, P. (2006), ‘From Leipzig to Leipzig’, disP, 165, pp. 61-70.
Google Scholar

CEC (Commission of the European Communities), (1999), European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP). Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Google Scholar

CEC (Commission of the European Communities), (2008), Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion. Turning Territorial Diversity into Strength, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Committee of the Regions and the European Economic and Social Committee, COM, 616 final, Brussels.
Google Scholar

ESPON Project 2.3.1 (2007), Application and Effects of the ESDP in the Member States, Final, revised report (version January).
Google Scholar

ESPON Project 2.3.2 (2007), Governance of Territorial and Urban Policies from EU to Local Level, Final, revised report (version February).
Google Scholar

EU MINISTERS FOR SPATIAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT (2007), Territorial Agenda of the European Union. Towards a More Competitive and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions, Agreed on the Occasion of the Informal Ministerial Meeting on Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion in Leipzig on May 24th/25th.
Google Scholar

FALUDI, A. (2009), ‘A Turning Point in the Development of European Spatial Planning? The "Territorial Agenda of the European Union" and the "First Action Programme"’, Progress in Planning 71, pp. 1-42.
Google Scholar

FALUDI, A. and WATERHOUT, B. (2002), The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective. No Masterplan, London, New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar

GEORGE, S. (2005), ‘Multi-level Governance and the European Union’, [in:] BACHE, I. and FLINDERS, M. (eds), Multi-level Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 107-126.
Google Scholar

GIANNAKOUROU, G. (2005), ‘Transforming Spatial Planning Policy in Mediterranean Countries: Europeanization and Domestic Change’, European Planning Studies, 13 (2), pp. 319-331.
Google Scholar

GUALINI, E. (2008), ‘"Territorial Cohesion" as a Category of Agency. The Missing Dimension in the EU Spatial Policy Debate’, European Journal of Spatial Development, Refereed Articles, 28.
Google Scholar

JANIN RIVOLIN, U. (2005a), ‘The Future of the ESDP in the Framework of Territorial Cohesion’, disP, 2, pp. 19-27.
Google Scholar

JANIN RIVOLIN, U. and FALUDI, A. (2005b), ‘The Hidden Face in European Spatial Planning: Innovations in Governance’, European Planning Studies, 13 (2), pp. 195-215.
Google Scholar

KOHLER-KOCH, B. (2002), ‘European Networks and Ideas: Changing National Policies?’, European Integration Online Papers (EioP), 6 (6).
Google Scholar

KRUPA, J., KUNKEL, K. and STEIN, A. (2008), Ein halbes Jahr Territoriale Agenda - Wegweisend für die Raumentwicklungspolitik? Dokumentation der Fachkonferenz am 11. Dezember 2007 in Potsdam http://www.irs-net.de/forschung/forschungsabteilung-1/progresdec/ProgreSDEC_Dokumentation.pdf last access: 3 December 2009.
Google Scholar

KUJATH, H. J. and STEIN, A. (2009), ‘Spatial Patterns in the Knowledge Society’, [in:] KILPER, H. (ed.), German Annual 2009. New Disparities in Spatial Development in Europe, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 37-50.
Google Scholar

NEWMAN, P. and THORNLEY, A. (1996), Urban Planning in Europe. International Competition, National Systems & Planning Projects, London, New York: Routledge.
Google Scholar

PRIEMUS, H. and ZONNEVELD, W. (2004), ‘Regional and Transnational Spatial Planning: Problems Today, Perspectives for the Future’, European Planning Studies, 12 (3), pp. 283-297.
Google Scholar

ProgreSDEC (2008), Final Report, Version as of 27 May, 2008. http://www.progresdec.org/intranet/documents/PROGRESDEC%20Final%20Report.pdf last access: December 3rd, 2009.
Google Scholar

SYKES, O. (2008), ‘The Importance of Context and Comparison in the Study of European Spatial Planning’, European Planning Studies, 16 (4), pp. 537-555.
Google Scholar

WILLIAMS, R. W. (2000), ‘Constructing the European Spatial Development Perspective - For Whom?’, European Planning Studies, 8 (3), pp. 357-365.
Google Scholar