Territoriality in the Strategies and Practices of the Territorial Cohesion Policy of the European Union: Territorial Challenges in Implementing “Soft Planning”

Luukkonen, Juho; Moilanen, Helka

doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.651806

Cited by 41 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These spaces of govemance are typically time limited and can emerge for a variety of reasons. Though brought to notice initially through UK research on planning, soft spaces appear to be an intemational phenomenon that exists well beyond the sectoral confines of planning, having been identified in variant forms in Australia (Searle and Bunker, 2010) and various European countries, whilst also being evident in the creation of transnational regional spaces such as the Baltic Sea and Danube Basin regions (Faludi, 2010;Luukkonen and Moilanen, 2012;Metzger and Schmitt, 2012;Stead, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spaces of Neoliberal Experimentation: Soft Spaces, Postpolitics, and Neoliberal Governmentality

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the proliferation of soft spaces of governance, focusing on planning. We move beyond more functional explanations to explore the politics of soft spaces, more specifically how soft space forms of governance operate as integral to processes of neoliberalisation, highlighting how such state forms facilitate neoliberalisation through their flexibility and variability. Recent state restructuring of the planning sector and emerging trends for soft spaces in England under the Coalition government proposals are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spaces of Neoliberal Experimentation: Soft Spaces, Postpolitics, and Neoliberal Governmentality

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They have also had impacts on environmental policy discourses and governance processes. The European transnational cooperation initiatives examined in this paper have not significantly affected the importance of other levels of decision-makingmuch power still remains at the national and sub-national levels of government (Luukkonen and Moilanen, 2012). In certain cases, however, these initiatives may be both supplementing and even supplanting formal administrative territories (see also Metzger and Schmitt, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Among the conclusions of a European Commission document on macro-regional strategies, for example, is the statement that 'regions should be defined so as to maximise the efficacy of the strategy …, [which] … may well mean flexible, even vague, definitions of the boundaries' (European Commission, 2009: 8). Authors such as Luukkonen and Moilanen (2012) claim that this illustrates a shift towards a more relational approach to governance (based on functional relations). However, as Faludi (2009) recognizes, these new policy and programming spaces often lack the administrative means to exercise power over territory.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rescaling Environmental Governance – the Influence of European Transnational Cooperation Initiatives

Stead

2014

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing transboundary nature of many environmental problems has not only elevated the importance of international environmental governance it has also contributed to shifts in the scales at which these problems are addressed and at which environmental programmes are implemented. The result is that environmental governance is experiencing rescaling which often involves a combination of changes including shifts in powers to other layers of decisionmaking, the emergence of new scales of policy intervention and alternative forms of intervention, and the appearance of new actor constellations. The emergence of 'soft' policy and programming spacesmulti-area sub-regions in which strategy is being made between or alongside formal institutions and decision-making processesis another phenomena associated with rescaling. This paper charts the rescaling of environmental governance in part of Europethe Baltic Sea Region (BSR)and examines the influence of European macroregional cooperation initiatives on the changing nature of environmental governance in the region.Note: the underlined text highlights those measures that are highly relevant for environmental policy/management projects. However, this does not imply that environmental policy/management projects cannot be (or were not) supported under other priorities listed in the table. D. SteadAs illustrated above, new spaces of macro-regional cooperation and programming in the Baltic Sea Region are being formed by EU initiatives such as INTERREG, the Northern Dimension and the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. These initiatives are leading to 'soft' (or softer) policy and programming spaces in addition to the policy boundaries of 3The second EU macro-regional strategy (for the Danube region) was launched in 2011. A third EU macro-regional strategy (for the Adriatic and Ionian region) is currently under preparation and is due to be published by the end of 2014. 4 The Northern Dimension and European Territorial Cooperation programmes are also explicitly mentioned in the Action Plan accompanying the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. D. SteadIn the Danube region, by contrast, various non-EU countries have been more fully involved in the development of the strategy and have taken on responsibility for coordinating certain actions. D. Stead

show abstract

“…in the eyes of some, however, the architecture of eCP, which favours the implementation of a multilevel type of governance, leads to a gaining influence of sub -national stakeholders (faludi, 2010, p. 173). Likewise, the direct and indirect effects of this Policy in strengthening the territorial cooperation process, and in promoting sound territorial governance processes (Luukkonen & Moilanen, 2012), can act as a tool to promote local and regional empowerment, despite the fact that the eU is a "highly heterogeneous space in terms of institutional and governance issues, and in terms of both the different national and regional modes". Conversely, Zaucha et al (2014, p. 249) argue that "almost 20 years of intergovernmental cooperation on territorial development among eU Member states has barely reinforced multiannual programming in relation to eU development (cohesion) policy".…”

Section: Eu Cohesion Policy and The Place -Based Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise, the related term 'territoriality' "is used in a number of senses", whilst it differs from the notion of 'territory' , as this "refers to behaviours related to the establishment and defence of territories" (Delaney, 2009, p. 196), or signifies an "attempt to affect, influence, or control actions, interactions, or access by asserting and attempting to enforce control over a specific geographic area" (sack, 1983). another significance found for this term is, for example, the sense of belonging to a given territory (trigal, 2015, p. 586), amongst many others (Luukkonen & Moilanen, 2012;Martin, rhys, & Michael, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is there a rise of the territorial dimension in the EU Cohesion Policy ?

Medeiros¹

2016

FIT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-this paper examines the role and importance of the territorial dimension of eU Cohesion Policy, during its five programming phases (1989 -2020), by relating this implementation process with several territorial elements, and by assessing their constant changes, namely in three main components and related elements: (i) the 'policy strategy' designed to include an integrated territorial perspective; (ii) the 'policy impacts' in territorial development and territorial cohesion, together with the use of territorial impact assessment procedures; and (iii) the focus on one or several 'territorial scales' , specifically through the support to multilevel -governance, territorial cooperation, and place -based strategies. Paradoxically, despite the continuous attempts to detach eU Cohesion Policy from its initial goals of promoting a more cohesive europe into a more neoliberalist paradigm type of 'investment Policy' , our analysis showed that the territorial dimension is still very much anchored with this Policy, and even gaining importance in several territorial related elements, such as the support to territorial cooperation and governance processes, and the use of territorial impact assessment procedures.

show abstract

Territoriality in the Strategies and Practices of the Territorial Cohesion Policy of the European Union: Territorial Challenges in Implementing “Soft Planning”

Cited by 41 publications

References 36 publications

Spaces of Neoliberal Experimentation: Soft Spaces, Postpolitics, and Neoliberal Governmentality

Spaces of Neoliberal Experimentation: Soft Spaces, Postpolitics, and Neoliberal Governmentality

Rescaling Environmental Governance – the Influence of European Transnational Cooperation Initiatives

Is there a rise of the territorial dimension in the EU Cohesion Policy ?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About