European Planning: The third way Andreas Faludi, Delft University of Technology, 5 July 2013

1. European Planning:
The Third Way
Andreas Faludi
Delft University of Technology
Aveiro, 5th july 2013

2. Content
1. Background
2. The EU: Two or three positions?
3. The spatial dimension of territory
4. European spatial planning
5. The ‘learning machine’
6. Perspectives

3. Background
• UK:
– Planning Theory
• NL:
– Leiden – Oxford
– Planning Doctrine
• Europe:
– ‘ESDP’ (2002)
– ‘CCC’ (2010)
• Space/territory

4. The EU: Two Positions Or Three?
Worning Shot
Internationalists:
Recognise complexity; no
clear message
Neo-nationalists:
Not ideological but
protectionist
Required:
Unity to adjust the
Netherlands and the West to
‘modern times’

5. The EU: Two Positions Or Three?
Federalist Campaign
• Answer to euro-
crisis
• Supranationalism
against inter-
governmentalism
• No third way(s):
– Governance
– Networking

6. The EU: Two Positions Or Three?
Neo-nationalists
Democracy:
Territorial loyality
Reconsideration of:
Supra-nationalism/
multiculturalism
‘Undemocratic’ EU
Future:
Multicultural nationalism
Sovereign cosmopolitism
Flood of Reactions

7. The EU: Two Positions Or Three?
Alternative Conceptualisations
EU resistance against:
Concentric circles
Variabel geometry
Multi-speed Europe
Hard core
À la carte
Ideology of state-
nation-territory, but:
Europe as it is
"We can have a flexible Europe where
we don't all have to do the same things
in the same way at the same time."

8. The Spatial Dimension of Territory:
Beyond National Borders
Security policy
makes it imperative
to break out
Critique of:
Territorialism
Territoriality
Container-thinking

9. The Spatial Dimension of Territory:
Rethinking Hierarchy
• Territory (Baudelle et al. 2011) =
– Sovereign
– Control
– Borders
• Territorialism (Scholte 2000):
Macro social space organised in
districts, towns, provinces,
countries and regions: container
view of territory
• Metageography (Murphy 2008):
Spatial structure of thought:
– Map of sovereigns states
– Map of, e.g., river basins

10. The Spatial Dimension of Territory:
Theoretical Dimension
• Nested jursidictions:
– Hooghe, Marks
(2010):
• Type I MLG
• Type II MLG
• Absolute and relative
space (Harvey 1969):
– ‘…no longer feasible
to take a container
view of space…’

11. The Spatial Dimension of Territory:
Control
• Sack (1986): ‘…spatial strategy to …control resources and
people by controlling area…’ - often equated with state control
• Hajer (2003):
– Diminishing ‘territorial synchrony’
– Policy works next to or across established orders
– Institutional void
• Marks (1992): EU an ‘untidy multilateral polity’
• Burgess, Vollard (2006): unbundling of territoriality
• Accepted wisdom: Governing becoming (territorial) governance

12. European spatial planning
Influence Jacques Delors
Cohesion policy
Europe 2000
(NL/F) planners to
the front
But: state territoriality
Commission only the
paymaster
End of story

13. European spatial planning
The ESDP
Spatial approach =
Territorial integration
Guidelines:
Polycentric
development
Access
Management
heritage

14. The ‘Learning Machine’
Modest success, but:
Transnational
Crossborder
EU nor member-state
planning: Third-way!
What role politics?

15. Perspectives:
Representative Democracy?
Nauwelaers (2012) over '...myopic
approaches, confined to regional boundaries
and overlooking potential cross-border
synergies’ in innovation policy
Key issue in (European) spatial planning
Territorial representation >< network society

16. Perspectives:
Networks around Delft

17. Perspectives