Suchergebnisse

There is a relative consensus about the multidimensional nature of territorial cohesion, encompassing economy, environment and society. However, its social dimension is rarely analysed (Faludi 2003, Schön, 2005). Following the Reports on Cohesion and EU ministerial meetings on spatial planning, this social dimension namely means "accessibility to basic services and facilities". The lack of attention is usually explained by a lack of data. This paper proposes a way to overcome the crucial challenges of data availability. The objective is to show the interest of tackling social questions at a local scale (i.e a combination of LAU (Local Administrative Unit) 1 and 2 in the European context) and its feasibility: an appropriate methodology may provide interesting results even with a limited set of data. The methodology relies on the fuzzy sets theory. This theory helps identifying influence areas of service providers following different policy perspectives: the minimum offer of services; the overlap between influence areas; or the territorial weaknesses in terms of unique membership to a service provider. The combination of these three perspectives gives an image of the various situations of the LAU in terms of access to basic services. The results of the methodology underline crucial challenges in the definition of the concept of territorial cohesion. Firstly, the question of redistribution is raised – if a European cohesive territory means an equal access of citizens to basic services, how to achieve this goal in spite of different national traditions in the organisation and use of services? Secondly, the concept helps putting back the citizens at the heart of the analysis, as well as their needs in everyday life. This is worth considering, in a time of general scepticism about the European Union in terms of remoteness from everyday concerns, although this raises also the question of the European model of society in which the European citizens recognize.

There is a relative consensus about the multidimensional nature of territorial cohesion, encompassing economy, environment and society. However, its social dimension is rarely analysed (Faludi 2003, Schön, 2005). Following the Reports on Cohesion and EU ministerial meetings on spatial planning, this social dimension namely means "accessibility to basic services and facilities". The lack of attention is usually explained by a lack of data. This paper proposes a way to overcome the crucial challenges of data availability. The objective is to show the interest of tackling social questions at a local scale (i.e a combination of LAU (Local Administrative Unit) 1 and 2 in the European context) and its feasibility: an appropriate methodology may provide interesting results even with a limited set of data. The methodology relies on the fuzzy sets theory. This theory helps identifying influence areas of service providers following different policy perspectives: the minimum offer of services; the overlap between influence areas; or the territorial weaknesses in terms of unique membership to a service provider. The combination of these three perspectives gives an image of the various situations of the LAU in terms of access to basic services. The results of the methodology underline crucial challenges in the definition of the concept of territorial cohesion. Firstly, the question of redistribution is raised – if a European cohesive territory means an equal access of citizens to basic services, how to achieve this goal in spite of different national traditions in the organisation and use of services? Secondly, the concept helps putting back the citizens at the heart of the analysis, as well as their needs in everyday life. This is worth considering, in a time of general scepticism about the European Union in terms of remoteness from everyday concerns, although this raises also the question of the European model of society in which the European citizens recognize.

This book introduces a comprehensive and updated analysis of the role of public policies to promote territorial cohesion processes and trends in a given territory. By being the first book taking a reflective and holistic approach on how public policies can lead to more cohesive and balanced territories, it advances theoretical avenues for academics and showcases current academic research to policymakers and practitioners by focusing on how public policies, being implemented in different territorial scales (urban, local, regional, national, and European), can actively contribute to foster territorial cohesion trends in a given territory. This reflective approach provides an opportunity for thinking about what lessons can be learned from past and ongoing experiences and how they can improve future implementation of public policies more effectively and efficiently toward territorial cohesion, since all existing analyses show that at the national level, no European country has achieved territorial cohesion trends over the past decades. As such, this book acts as a valid and useful policy manual that effectively contributes to inverting current territorial exclusion trends at the national level, by highlighting best policy practices and a comprehensive introduction to contemporary thinking about how public policies can play a decisive role in boosting territorial cohesion processes in a given territory.

Territorial cohesion has its legal basis in the Treaty of Lisbon and is one of the overarching goals in the 2007-2013 Cohesion Policy instruments. Still the definition of territorial cohesion can be characterized as a 'moving target' - each EU Member State and region conceptualizes the policy goal in as befits the specific regional challenges and opportunities of the territory. The thesis examines the concept of territorial cohesion as a normative goal that is intended to be implemented at various territorial governance levels. The point of departure of the thesis is that it is important for institutions, as formal and informal 'rules of the game', to have the capacity or potential mobilization resources to plan for and achieve territorial cohesion and regional development. Institutional capacity is operationalized by use of a general framework consisting of knowledge resources, relational resources and mobilization capacity. The thesis is built on six papers that each deal with an issue (EU enlargement, climate change adaptation and mitigation, innovative capacity and cores and peripheries) that has territorial impact at three levels - the international or EU level, the transnational or macro-regional level and the local/regional level. The papers use primarily qualitative methods and each paints a very different picture of the potential role of institutions in understanding territorial cohesion. A cover essay links the articles analytically, building the question of how territorial cohesion is conceptualized on multiple levels through different theoretical and policy 'lenses'. Synthesized results of the papers confirm that there are two quite different logics of action informing the way territorial cohesion is used as a goal or a means at the three levels. Applying the institutional capacity framework to cases working towards territorial cohesion at different levels has concluded that knowledge-building resources are most important for EU-level institutions, relational resources are most important at the ...

This paper proposes and defines new metropolitan governance strategies for territorial cohesion between inland and urban areas. Different reflections are here presented to comprehend how is it possible to implement cities' ability to understand and manage metropolitan dynamics. In Europe, urbanisation and land abandonment is a widespread phenomenon compared to many other parts of the world. According to research carried out by the European Union it is estimated that four out of five European citizens will be living in urban areas abandoning villages and rural areas. Many European metropolitan areas are character-rized by overpopulated centres, degraded suburbs and different abandoned or almost abandoned inland areas. These areas, if well connected among them and to the main metropolitan centre, can contribute to solving many urban challenges. There is the necessity to image metropolitan areas as a single entity to increase the cohesion of lands. The latent capital of inland areas can be considered as driving factor behind territorial cohesion and development. This paper analyses in deep the case of the Italian Metropolitan Cities proposing a new governance approach to increase the capacity of urban systems to adapt to natural and man-made changes, considering the hinterland as a strong point rather than a disadvantage. Strategic and Spatial Plans drive the growth of metropolitan areas in a competitive space-economy and support sustainable development policy by ensuring a balance between urban areas with strong competitiveness and inland areas

Inequality not only has an economic and social dimension, but also a territorial dimension with relevant political implications. The clear regional differences in economic development and employment and therefore in quality of life and opportunities in the European Union (EU) make the social situation increasingly unequal in territorial terms. There seems to be a growing consensus that large and dynamic urban areas are the future, while rural areas are perceived as having low potential. In many EU Member States, populism as a political force seems to grow in these so-called "places that don't matter", in numbers which may create systemic risks. The strengthening of the economic, social and territorial cohesion is one of the Union's main objectives. Already the Treaty of Rome (1957) established mechanisms to foster the economic and social cohesion, but it was not until the Treaty of Lisbon that a third dimension, the territorial cohesion, was introduced. Taking advantage of the tenth anniversary of the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the aim of this text is to analyse the concept and instruments of EU's territorial cohesion policy in order to study the challenges of this policy. ; En este texto se parte de la premisa de que la desigualdad no solo tiene una dimensión económica y social, sino que también tiene una dimensión territorial con implicaciones políticas relevantes. Las claras diferencias regionales del poder económico y del empleo y por tanto de calidad de vida y oportunidades en la Unión Europea (UE) hacen que la situación social sea cada vez más desigual en términos territoriales. Parece haber un consenso creciente de que las aglomeraciones grandes y dinámicas son el futuro, las zonas rurales se perciben como de bajo potencial. En muchos países, el populismo como fuerza política parece arraigarse en estos llamados "lugares que no importan". No obstante, fortalecer la cohesión económica, social y territorial es uno de los objetivos principales de la UE. Ya el Tratado de Roma (1957) estableció mecanismos para potenciar la cohesión económica y social, pero no fue hasta el Tratado de Lisboa cuando se introduce una tercera dimensión: la cohesión territorial. Aprovechando el décimo aniversario de la entrada en vigor del Tratado de Lisboa se pretende revisar las bases y los instrumentos de política de la cohesión territorial de la UE para estudiar los retos de esta política.

This paper proposes and defines new metropolitan governance strategies for territorial cohesion between inland and urban areas. Different reflections are here presented to comprehend how is it possible to implement cities' ability to understand and manage metropolitan dynamics. In Europe, urbanisation and land abandonment is a widespread phenomenon compared to many other parts of the world. According to research carried out by the European Union it is estimated that four out of five European citizens will be living in urban areas abandoning villages and rural areas. Many European metropolitan areas are character-rized by overpopulated centres, degraded suburbs and different abandoned or almost abandoned inland areas. These areas, if well connected among them and to the main metropolitan centre, can contribute to solving many urban challenges. There is the necessity to image metropolitan areas as a single entity to increase the cohesion of lands. The latent capital of inland areas can be considered as driving factor behind territorial cohesion and development. This paper analyses in deep the case of the Italian Metropolitan Cities proposing a new governance approach to increase the capacity of urban systems to adapt to natural and man-made changes, considering the hinterland as a strong point rather than a disadvantage. Strategic and Spatial Plans drive the growth of metropolitan areas in a competitive space-economy and support sustainable development policy by ensuring a balance between urban areas with strong competitiveness and inland areas.

This paper proposes and defines new metropolitan governance strategies for territorial cohesion between inland and urban areas. Different reflections are here presented to comprehend how is it possible to implement cities' ability to understand and manage metropolitan dynamics. In Europe, urbanisation and land abandonment is a widespread phenomenon compared to many other parts of the world. According to research carried out by the European Union it is estimated that four out of five European citizens will be living in urban areas abandoning villages and rural areas. Many European metropolitan areas are character-rized by overpopulated centres, degraded suburbs and different abandoned or almost abandoned inland areas. These areas, if well connected among them and to the main metropolitan centre, can contribute to solving many urban challenges. There is the necessity to image metropolitan areas as a single entity to increase the cohesion of lands. The latent capital of inland areas can be considered as driving factor behind territorial cohesion and development. This paper analyses in deep the case of the Italian Metropolitan Cities proposing a new governance approach to increase the capacity of urban systems to adapt to natural and man-made changes, considering the hinterland as a strong point rather than a disadvantage. Strategic and Spatial Plans drive the growth of metropolitan areas in a competitive space-economy and support sustainable development policy by ensuring a balance between urban areas with strong competitiveness and inland areas.

In this first issue of Nordregio News we aim to provide a better understanding of the ongoing discussion on the future European Territorial Cohesion policy and specifically the role of the Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020 (TA 2020).

The Barca Report advocates for developmental policies to be 'place-based': integrated as far as they affect 'places'. The debate on territorial cohesion is equally concerned with integrating relevant policies and actions. This requires well-established democratic institutions and adequate responses to the demands of technical systems and of markets. Following Lisbeth Hooghe and Gary Marks, the respective arrangements are described as Governance Type I and Type II. All levels of government, including that of the EU, partake in both types, but relations between them are problematic, particularly in the context of Europe 2020: Will this EU strategy be mainly a matter for Directorate-Generals and their various clients pursuing their policies (Governance Type II), or will Cohesion policy, with its more integrated and decentralised approach, involving many levels of government and stakeholders (Governance Type I) form platforms for integrating them? This paper presents four scenarios; each based on a combination of strong/weak Governance Type I and Type II, which are labelled as the 'Anglo-Saxon', 'Saint-Simonian', 'Rhineland' and the 'European' Scenarios. The authors prefer the latter, but the best one can hope for in the short term is for this option not to fall by the wayside. ; The paper is published by the European Journal of Spatial Development (EJSD). The previous version of the journal was host by Nordregio.