Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy

Bernard Elissalde; Frédéric Santamaria

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

| Peer-Reviewed

Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy

Bernard Elissalde, Frédéric Santamaria

Published in Social Sciences (Volume 3, Issue 4-1)

Received: 8 April 2014 Accepted: 9 May 2014 Published: 14 June 2014

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

By using three types of sources (official sources of the European Union, results of a questionnaire to practitioners, results of applied researches on European spatial planning), we demonstrate that no precise definitions can be given of two main notions of European spatial planning. This result is coherent with the literature on this field. This situation questions the operational interest of such notions. Some consider that a “pragmatic” view must be adopted. For them, research on that field should take into account what the notions are "doing" instead of trying to understand what "are" these notions. Nevertheless, a strictly pragmatic approach evades the issue of the choice of policies that are always normative (or “essentialist”).

Published in	Social Sciences (Volume 3, Issue 4-1) This article belongs to the Special Issue Geographical Evidence in Changing Europe
DOI	10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
Page(s)	4-12
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2014. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Territorial Cohesion, Regional Competitiveness, Regional Policy, European Union, Notions

References

[1]	B. Palier, Y. Surel & al, L’Europe en action. L’européanisation dans une perspective comparée. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2007.
[2]	G. Tatzberger, “Spatial Visions, Concepts and Metaphors: their Essential Role in European Spatial Development and Policy Discourse”, in Rethinking European Spatial Policy as a Hologram, Actions, Institutions, Discourses, L. Doria, V. Fedeli, and C. Tedesco, Eds. Londres: Ashgate, 2007, pp. 278-297.
[3]	B. Elissalde, F. Santamaria, Ph. Jeanne, “Harmony and Melody in Discourse on European Cohesion”, European Spatial Planning, 2013, DOI : 10.1080/09654313.2013.782389
[4]	H. Mastop, “Performance in Dutch spatial planning: an introduction”, Environment and Planning, B : Planning and Design, 24, pp. 807-813, 1997.
[5]	A. Faludi, “The European Spatial Development Perspective – What Next?”. European Planning Studies, 8, 2, pp. 237-250, 2000.
[6]	Faludi, “The application of the European Spatial Development Perspective: introduction to a special issue”. Town and Country Planning Review, 74, 1, pp. 1-9, 2003.
[7]	Faludi, “Unfinished business: European spatial planning in the 2000s”. Town and Country Planning Review, 74, 1, pp. 121-140, 2003.
[8]	Waterhout, The institutionnalisation of European spatial planning, Delft: Delft university of technology, 2008.
[9]	O. B. Jensen, T. Richardson, Making european space. Mobility, power and territorial identity, Londres, New-York: Routledge, 2004.
[10]	M. E. Porter, “Regions and the new economics of competition”, in Global City-regions Allen J. Scott, Eds. Oxford: Oxford university Press, 2001, pp. 139-157.
[11]	G. Bristow, “Everyone's ...is a winner, Problematising the discourse of regional competitiveness”, Journal of economic geography, 5, pp. 285-304, 2005.
[12]	R. Camagni, “Compétitivité territoriale, milieux locaux et apprentissage collectif : une contre-réflexion critique”, Revue d’économie régionale et urbaine, 4, pp. 553-578, 2002.
[13]	A. Markusen, “Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: The case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies”. Regional Studies, 33, 9, pp. 869–884, 1999.
[14]	Faludi, B. Waterhout, The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective. London: Routledge. 2002.
[15]	Shaw, D., O. Sykes, “The concept of polycentricity in European spatial planning: Reflections on its interpretation and application in the practice of spatial planning”. International Planning Studies, 9, 4, pp. 283–306, 2004.
[16]	G. Abrahams, “What “Is” Territorial Cohesion? What Does It “Do”?: Essentialist Versus Pragmatic Approaches to Using Concepts”. European Planning Studies. 2013, DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.819838 (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2013.819838)
[17]	S.M. Stein, T. L. Harper, “Creativity and innovation: Divergence and convergence in pragmatic dialogical planning”. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32, 1, pp. 5–17, 2012

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bernard Elissalde, Frédéric Santamaria. (2014). Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Social Sciences, 3(4-1), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bernard Elissalde; Frédéric Santamaria. Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Soc. Sci. 2014, 3(4-1), 4-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bernard Elissalde, Frédéric Santamaria. Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Soc Sci. 2014;3(4-1):4-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12,
  author = {Bernard Elissalde and Frédéric Santamaria},
  title = {Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy},
  journal = {Social Sciences},
  volume = {3},
  number = {4-1},
  pages = {4-12},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  abstract = {By using three types of sources (official sources of the European Union, results of a questionnaire to practitioners, results of applied researches on European spatial planning), we demonstrate that no precise definitions can be given of two main notions of European spatial planning. This result is coherent with the literature on this field. This situation questions the operational interest of such notions. Some consider that a “pragmatic” view must be adopted. For them, research on that field should take into account what the notions are "doing" instead of trying to understand what "are" these notions. Nevertheless, a strictly pragmatic approach evades the issue of the choice of policies that are always normative (or “essentialist”).},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy
AU  - Bernard Elissalde
AU  - Frédéric Santamaria
Y1  - 2014/06/14
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
T2  - Social Sciences
JF  - Social Sciences
JO  - Social Sciences
SP  - 4
EP  - 12
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2326-988X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
AB  - By using three types of sources (official sources of the European Union, results of a questionnaire to practitioners, results of applied researches on European spatial planning), we demonstrate that no precise definitions can be given of two main notions of European spatial planning. This result is coherent with the literature on this field. This situation questions the operational interest of such notions. Some consider that a “pragmatic” view must be adopted. For them, research on that field should take into account what the notions are "doing" instead of trying to understand what "are" these notions. Nevertheless, a strictly pragmatic approach evades the issue of the choice of policies that are always normative (or “essentialist”).
VL  - 3
IS  - 4-1
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Bernard Elissalde

UFR de Lettres et Sciences Humaines, Université de Rouen, Mont Saint Aignan, France
Frédéric Santamaria

UFR Géographie, Histoire et Sciences de la Société, Université Paris Diderot-Paris 7, Paris, France

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bernard Elissalde, Frédéric Santamaria. (2014). Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Social Sciences, 3(4-1), 4-12. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bernard Elissalde; Frédéric Santamaria. Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Soc. Sci. 2014, 3(4-1), 4-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bernard Elissalde, Frédéric Santamaria. Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy. Soc Sci. 2014;3(4-1):4-12. doi: 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12,
  author = {Bernard Elissalde and Frédéric Santamaria},
  title = {Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy},
  journal = {Social Sciences},
  volume = {3},
  number = {4-1},
  pages = {4-12},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ss.s.2014030401.12},
  abstract = {By using three types of sources (official sources of the European Union, results of a questionnaire to practitioners, results of applied researches on European spatial planning), we demonstrate that no precise definitions can be given of two main notions of European spatial planning. This result is coherent with the literature on this field. This situation questions the operational interest of such notions. Some consider that a “pragmatic” view must be adopted. For them, research on that field should take into account what the notions are "doing" instead of trying to understand what "are" these notions. Nevertheless, a strictly pragmatic approach evades the issue of the choice of policies that are always normative (or “essentialist”).},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Territorial Cohesion and Regional Competitiveness: Defining Key-Notions in the EU's Regional Policy
AU  - Bernard Elissalde
AU  - Frédéric Santamaria
Y1  - 2014/06/14
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
DO  - 10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
T2  - Social Sciences
JF  - Social Sciences
JO  - Social Sciences
SP  - 4
EP  - 12
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2326-988X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ss.s.2014030401.12
AB  - By using three types of sources (official sources of the European Union, results of a questionnaire to practitioners, results of applied researches on European spatial planning), we demonstrate that no precise definitions can be given of two main notions of European spatial planning. This result is coherent with the literature on this field. This situation questions the operational interest of such notions. Some consider that a “pragmatic” view must be adopted. For them, research on that field should take into account what the notions are "doing" instead of trying to understand what "are" these notions. Nevertheless, a strictly pragmatic approach evades the issue of the choice of policies that are always normative (or “essentialist”).
VL  - 3
IS  - 4-1
ER  -

Copy | Download