2017
DOI: 10.1177/2399654417717068
| View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Conventionally how states ‘infrastructured’ was based around the monocentrism of the positive state. The progressive liberalisation of infrastructure over the past three decades has given rise to polycentric national infrastructure systems (NIS). This polycentric NIS exhibits a higher degree of structural, spatial and operational complexity with the state being one player though it still plays a prominent role not just through its own activities but also in seeking to steer the system to meet its territorial o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1
1
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The mandate reflects Mann's (1984) core synthesis of the main functions of the state with the components of the mandate being mutually supporting and overlapping in their design and operation. As identified in Johnson and Turner (2017) and Turner (2018) the components of the infrastructural mandate are control, security, integration and growth/development. These established criteria have been supported by a fifth identifiable component: sustainability.…”
Section: Infrastructuring and The State: The National Infrastructure mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The mandate reflects Mann's (1984) core synthesis of the main functions of the state with the components of the mandate being mutually supporting and overlapping in their design and operation. As identified in Johnson and Turner (2017) and Turner (2018) the components of the infrastructural mandate are control, security, integration and growth/development. These established criteria have been supported by a fifth identifiable component: sustainability.…”
Section: Infrastructuring and The State: The National Infrastructure mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such spatial complexity opens up the possibility that the efficacy of the operation of the NIS (or a component or sub-system of it) in one part of a state's territory can have implications for the system's operation in other -if not all, if the component is deemed critical (see below) -parts of the state's territory. Spatial complexity also extends to inter-state infrastructural links and how the intensity of interactions between respective NIS can also influence the operation of another state's system (Turner 2018).…”
Section: Infrastructuring and The State: The National Infrastructure mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To some (such as Strange, 1996), this represents the retreat of the state; to others it is a pragmatic strategy to upgrade the NIS when the state is financially constrained (Schneider and Jäger, 2003). However, the emergence of such polycentric systems (Turner, 2017) is only realised through state sanction given that the state maintains its influence through conditions of ownership, regulation, direct finance and other methods. In short, even though the state may not own these systems, it can still steer owners and users towards specific aims that support its territorial objectives (Braithwaite and Drahos, 2000;Moran, 2003).…”
Section: Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rise of the polycentric NIS underlines the above point that the state will sustain a strong legitimisation function, especially where such infrastructures are deemed critical to state territoriality (Turner, 2017). In most cases, the state will tightly regulate to ensure its interests are met with the option of expropriation should non-state providers violate its mandate (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2008).…”
Section: Securitymentioning
confidence: 99%