How does(n't) Urban Shrinkage get onto the Agenda? Experiences from Leipzig, Liverpool, Genoa and Bytom

Abstract

This article discusses the question of how urban shrinkage gets onto the agenda of public‐policy agencies. It is based on a comparison of the agenda‐setting histories of four European cities, Liverpool (UK), Leipzig (Germany), Genoa (Italy) and Bytom (Poland), which have all experienced severe population losses but show very different histories with respect to how local governments reacted to them. We use the political‐science concepts of ‘systemic vs. institutional agendas’ and ‘policy windows’ as a conceptual frame to compare these experiences. The article demonstrates that shrinkage is hardly ever responded to in a comprehensive manner but rather that policies are only implemented in a piecemeal way in selected fields. Moreover, it is argued that variations in institutional contexts and political dynamics lead to considerable differences with regard to the chances of making shrinkage a matter of public intervention. Against this background, the article takes issue with the idea that urban shrinkage only needs to be ‘accepted’ by policymakers who would need to overcome their growth‐oriented cultural perceptions, as has been suggested in a number of recent writings, and calls for a more differentiated, context‐sensitive view.

Re-thinking non-core regions: planning strategies and practices beyond growth

“…Within this special issue, we give space to such ideas from non-core regions which drastically differ from orthodox planning approaches. This is not to say that growth-based strategies for regional economic development are generally misleading but to acknowledge there are more and more places where such strategies are prone to failure (Bernt et al, 2014;Haase, Athanasopoulou, & Rink, 2016;Wirth, Elis, Müller, & Yamamoto, 2016), in particular if they are based upon unrealistic ideas of population growth or strong external investments as a lever for policy-making. Further, we argue that all too often, development strategies for non-core regions are based upon classic ideas around agro-food industries or tourism although alternative development paths would be possible, which might take into account a more differentiated conception of local economies outside the traditional functions (Reidolf, 2016).…”

“…In this respect, the global financial crisis also marked a turning point for urban and regional planning, as has been acknowledged by Siemiatycki andSiemiatycki (2016) or Ponzini (2016). Planning philosophies, which do not adopt the idea of generating growth, are beyond the scope of the established planning practice that is considered to be 'ill-prepared for managing shrinkage' (Bernt et al, 2014(Bernt et al, , p. 1750. Hence, this special issue is particularly addressing heterodox, alternative approaches of development beyond the classical growth-based strategies focussed towards smart specialization and inward investment (European Commission [EC], 2010;McCann & Ortega-Argilés, 2015).…”

An Evaluation of Urban Renewal Policies of Shenzhen, China

“…Moreover, they may be market-oriented 1,2012), which applies to the governmental oversight of all urban renewal projects. The definitions of urban renewal domains are presented as follow.…”

“…These problems include obsolete buildings, overcrowding, and poor environmental conditions, and these problems have become an urgent concern for local governments [1]. Urban renewal is regarded as an important priority in addressing the urban decay issue, through the promotion of land values and in cultivating innovative industries, as well as being strategically significant to the regional interest in fostering socio-economic development [2][3][4].…”

Quality of life in rural areas: A topic for the Rural Development policy?

“…This has to do with the fact that if words of promise or intent lack entrenchment in action they become reduced to the role of verbal embellishment, which, in turn, may undermine trust, a basic element of democracy (in Europe, the problem of disparity between policy rhetoric and practice has been observed in a wide variety of areas; cf. Ribeiro, Marques, 2002;Gelan et al, 2008;Peckham et al, 2012;Stenseke, 2012;Bernt et al, 2014).…”