4_Lecture_Planning and Planning systems of Southern Europe

Lecture 1 - Introduction: economic geography and its recent paradigms
Regional
Geography
of Southern
Europe
WS 2021-2022
Lecture 4
24-11-2021

Structure of
the course
1) Introduction to regional geography and the focal study region
2) Regional geography of Southern Europe: differences and uniqueness
3) The territorial governance of Southern Europe
4) Spatial planning (including SSP) and planning systems of Southern Europe
5) The economic geography of Southern Europe
6) EU, EU integration and funding mechanisms for development
7) Southern Europe, low-income EU regions and EU Cohesion Policy
8) Research and development in Southern Europe: where and what for
9) The social dimension of cross-border relations across SE
10) Southern Europe and sustainability transition efforts
11) Conclusion: Regional futures across Southern Europe
Lectures

Recap - territorial governance
sustainable spatial development
Innovation and the destabilization of established systems
(link OLAT)

Administrative governance >
Portugal and Spain
PT: Stronger intermunicipal cooperation
ES: Stronger regional autonomy
Both cases history matters + EU Funding

Territorial governance – Greece
Greece is a parliamentary republic under the 1975 Constitution. The Parliament (Vouli ton Ellinon) is
unicameral and consists of 300 members. The Head of State is the President of the Republic and the
Government is led by a Prime Minister.
Since 1 January 2011, when the Kallikratis Program entered officially into force, the
Hellenic Republic has comprised seven Decentralised Administrations (apokentromeni
dioikisi), thirteen Regions (perifereies) and 325 Municipalities (dimoi).

Territorial governance – Greece
• It used to be much more centralised but over the last decades it has been
undergoing reforms which ended up with the adoption of an extensive
administrative reform in 2010/2011 called “Kallikratis”.
• The decentralisation process started in 1986 with the creation of 13 Regions.
• Decentralisation was strengthened in 1994 with elected prefectural bodies and
the extension of the municipalities’ competences.
• The 2010/2011 Kallikratis Program reorganised the territorial division by uniting
existing municipalities, modified the vertical division of competences in favour
of municipalities and abolished decentralised public administrations.
• Finally, the Hellenic Republic has recently adopted the Law 4071/2012
“Provisions for local development, local government and decentralised
administration – Transposition of Directive 2009/50/EC”2, which focuses mainly
on special issues of local authorities.
• The Municipalities and Regions constitute the first and second-level of
local self-government

Regional geography – Greece
Source
Regions shape, plan and implement policies at regional level as part of their responsibilities
under the principles of sustainable development and social cohesion of the country, taking into
account of national and European policies.
Municipalities manage and regulate all local matters in accordance with the principles of
subsidiarity and proximity with the aim of protection, development and continuous
improvement of the interests and the quality of life of society; citizens in general.

Regional level Municipal level
Nacional level
Source
Since early 2011

Regional level Municipal level
Source
Regions design,
plan and
implement
regional policies
within the context
of their
competencies,
according to the
principles of
transparency,
effectiveness and
efficiency.

First and second level local authorities (regional and municipalities) are elected by direct universal
suffrage in a secret ballot every five years. These elections are held concurrently at the same polling
stations with those of the European Parliament.
Source

• Progress of the country towards more open government, the protection of
citizens’ rights – through for instance the institution of the Ombudsman
(investigates complaints about maladministration by EU institutions), the
protection of personal data and the opportunities for partnership formation,
especially at the local level.
• On the other hand, the actual implementation of the administrative reforms that
have been undertaken remains slow and often subject to reversals. An indicative
example is the reform regarding decentralization and empowerment of the sub-
regional levels (local/municipal) over the last decade.
• This is sadly a process which has become entangled in negative rulings of the
Council of State, the supreme administrative court. However, international and
especially European influence is a strong positive factor towards a less rigid
administrative structure which is more receptive to governance rationale.
• The implementation of European Initiatives such as URBAN (Urban Agenda for
the EU) have been a path to familiarization of administrative, political and social
bodies and agencies with the culture of governance.
Sapountzaki Kalliopi, 2007

Territorial governance – Italy
An external observer might add that in the case of Italy, besides the EU’s
push, an internal imperative and inherent trend of the political and
institutional system towards regionalization facilitated its rapid
adjustment to the governance rationale.
• In Italy, the basic institutional reforms targeted (since the 1990’s) the
empowerment of regional and sub-regional level with special
emphasis on spatial planning.
• These reforms are as follows (Cotella et al. 2005):
• A new version of chapter 5 of the Italian Constitution (2001)
giving legislative powers to regions;
• Organization of local autonomies (new spatial planning roles for
provinces)

Territorial governance – Italy
• These reforms are (Cotella et al, 2005):
• Creation of “metropolitan cities” with
the status of provinces;
• Direct election of the mayor, of the
province president, the municipal and
provincial council;
• Government delegation of functions and
competencies to the regions and local
bodies aiming among others at
administrative simplification;
Distinctive characteristic
when compared to PT; ES;
GR

Territorial governance – Italy Administrative divisions
CIA’s World Factbook
• 15 regions with ordinary statute
• Regions: Abruzzo, Basilicata, Calabria,
Campania, Emilia-Romagna, Lazio
(Latium), Liguria, Lombardia, Marche,
Molise, Piemonte (Piedmont), Puglia
(Apulia), Toscana (Tuscany), Umbria,
Veneto;
• 5 autonomous regions
• Autonomous regions: Friuli Venezia
Giulia, Sardegna (Sardinia), Sicilia (Sicily),
Trentino-Alto Adige (Trentino-South
Tyrol) or Trentino-Suedtirol (German),
Valle d'Aosta (Aosta Valley) or Vallee
d'Aoste (French)
• Metropolitan cities
• Are administrative divisions of Italy,
operative since 2015; Metropolitan
councillors are elected at-large for five-
year terms;

• 15 Regions with ordinary statute
• These regions, whose statutes are approved by their regional councils, were
created in 1970, even though the Italian Constitution dates back to 1948.
Since the constitutional reform of 2001 they have had residual legislative
powers. The regions have exclusive legislative power with respect to any
matters not expressly reserved to state law (Article 117);
• Yet their financial autonomy is quite modest;
• 5 Autonomous regions with special statute
• Article 116 of the Italian Constitution grants home rule to five regions,
allowing them some legislative, administrative and financial power to a
varying extent, depending on their specific statute.
• These regions became autonomous in order to take into account cultural
differences and protect linguistic minorities. Moreover, the government
wanted to prevent their separation from Italy after the Second World War.

Territorial governance – metropolitan cities
The metropolitan city, as defined by
law, includes a large core city and the
smaller surrounding towns that are
closely related to it with regard to
economic activities and essential
public services, as well as to cultural
relations and to territorial features.
(De Luca and Moccia 2017)
• Local planning and zoning;
• Provision of local police services;
• Transport and city services coordination.

Macroregions are the first-level NUTS (The Classification of Territorial Units for
Statistics) of the European Union (in comparison they use a stronger regional definition)
Every region has a statute that serves as a regional constitution, determining the form of
government and the fundamental principles of the organization and the functioning of the
region, as prescribed by the Constitution of Italy (Article 123).
Metropolitan
city
Regions
Macro
regions

Conditions favourable to governance – other than the EU’s push are:
• Economic interests of participants (i.e., to gain access to funding and other resources)
• Strong traditions of informal governance arrangements procedures which may however
lead to distorted governance (e.g., Portugal, Greece)
• Rising importance of local and regional societies, scarcity of resources, environmental
problems transgressing administrative boundaries, globalization and competition
pressures, democratic deficit and crisis of democracy (e.g., Greece, Portugal)
• Strong impetus to Europeanization and modernization of the society and the economy
(e.g., Portugal), overcome limited powers and competences (e.g., Greece, Italy) and
increasing push for strategic view of territorial policies – stronger governance approach.
Territorial governance – Southern Europe

Unfavourable conditions:
• Relationships of mistrust and mutual suspicion between the state and the citizens (which
may also act in favour of governance) (e.g., Greece, Portugal)
• Unclear political polarization, reluctance to share power (e.g., Portugal), problems of
legitimacy of partnerships, communication problems and antagonisms between central and
local / regional authorities (e.g., Northern Portugal) or between public and private agencies
• Political patronage of administrative authorities, geopolitical divisions, complexity and
tardiness of governance procedures, hostility to spatial planning (e.g., Greece)
• A culture of competitiveness and concentration on own interests (e.g., Portugal) diffused
among authorities, political parties, private agencies, NGOs even the individual citizens, a
diffused culture of law disobeying and the education of planners
• Professionals and officials lagging behind in terms of the new
skills needed for governance.
• The danger of partisan governance is always lurking especially
in the countries of the European South.

Multi-level
territorial
governance
Forms of cooperation Countries Keep in
mind the
“dead of
the district”
in Portugal
in favour of
inter-
municipal
cooperation
Corporate spatial
responsibility
Jörg Knieling 2012

Some are established formally by government, particularly for metropolitan
areas.
• Municipalities are increasingly collaborating voluntarily for the provision
of services and in some cases planning, with such arrangements being
extensive.
• But the largest category, and one for which it is notoriously difficult to get
accurate data are ‘soft territorial cooperation areas’.
• In these regions, the starting point is cross-border cooperation but there
is also a measure of inter-sectoral cooperation as a wide range of
organisations get involved.
There is much reporting of a rescaling of planning competences in ‘functional
planning regions’ to address the reality of environmental, commuting,
economic and other flows across borders.
Source ESPON 2018

• In Italy, while the empowerment of the regional / metropolitan level is
welcomed as a precondition for territorial decisions promoting sustainability
the needed guidance at the national level remains poor or absolutely missing.
Besides the transferred competencies to the regional level are of sectoral
orientation and the mechanisms of competitiveness of contractual-type
partnerships (pursuing access to funding) exclude horizontal cooperation
among territories.
• In Portugal, the balance of political power is featured by the gradual shift of
powers to the local level (municipal//inter-municipal). However, local
authorities and their political leadership reproduce the past model of the
authoritarian central government and administration. Populist attitudes on
the part of local politicians and introversion make cooperation between
territories at the local level a hard task. This condition combined with the
weakness of the regional level actually incapacitates territorial governance at
regional level.

Possible exam question
• Please define territorial governance and further explain how a governance
approach to territorial development is distinctive from a state-led government.
• Please identity and further argue on possible justifications explaining the trend
in Southern Europe of transitioning from government to governance.
• In the lectures we explored examples of how countries, such as Portugal,
overcome a weak regional governance capacity. Could you please elaborate on
how Portugal overcome such weakness?
Source

Spatial planning and European planning systems

Source
ESPON 2007
The EU
compendium of
spatial planning
Spatial planning – European systems
2008

Hersperger et al. 2019
Regional
economic
Urbanism
ESPON 2007
The EU compendium
of spatial planning
1997
Comprehensive
integrated
Comprehensive
integrated plus
regional
economic
1997
-
2019
Urban planning
tradition, embedded
with an architectural and
urban design mentality
geared towards building
control - endorse a rigid,
statutory and regulatory
planning style

2021
Berisha et al. 2021 with respect to the models (X) of spatial planning and
(Y) of spatial development

Defining spatial planning
source
Spatial planning is about setting
frameworks and principles to guide the
location of development and physical
infrastructure.
It consists of a set of governance practices
for developing and implementing
strategies, plans, policies and projects, and
for regulating the location, timing and
form of spatial development.

Defining spatial
planning
• Investment decisions, principles for
regulating land-use change, and ideas about
spatial organization generate constraints and
opportunities. These help to shape urban and
regional dynamics.
• This perspective on spatial planning reflects
an “institutionalist” approach to social change
and public policy.
• With respect to spatial planning systems,
there is a settled acceptance of the importance
of individual property rights, combined with a
recognition that it is legitimate for
governments to limit these rights in the
collective interest. source

Contemporary urban
and regional dynamics
• Spatial planning is part of the
relations of governance of a
region. The term governance is
used here to encompass both
the formal machinery of
government and the informal
alliances and networks through
which business groups,
environmental groups,
neighbourhood groups and
amenity societies interlink with
formal government and in that
way manage aspects of the
collective affairs
source

Contemporary urban
and regional dynamics
• Spatial planning is typically embedded in
local governance, the institutions of
regional and local government and the
coalitions and pressure groups that cluster
around these levels, although national
governments continue to play a role in
many places. EU policy also affects the
regulations incorporated in planning
systems, as well as the resources available
for investment in programmes and projects
(e.g., EU funding; Environmental policy).
source

Contemporary trends in spatial planning
• From a role in the provision of welfare services, products and facilities (the “provider
state”) to a proactive, enabling role providing a framework within which firms, agencies
and voluntary groups may deliver services and promote spatial development (e.g.,
Southern Europe);
• From integrated formal government, with policy articulation and delivery concentrated in
a few key arenas (such as municipal or regional governments, or the functional
departments of national government) to a fragmentation of governance tasks among
different agencies—public, private, mixed;
• From a dominance of national ministries, politicians and lobby groups to regional and
local ones (especially in France, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Portugal);
• From a clear separation of public and private spheres, to new forms of partnership
between public and private sectors, between state and market, and between the public
sector and citizens;
• From hierarchical and bureaucratic forms of organization to proactive and interactive
forms of governance, building constituencies of support and negotiating contributions
from various parties to programmes and projects.
source

Spatial planning systems have
distinctive institutional forms in
each country, and they are realized
in different ways in different
places.
Typically in Europe, a major
function is the regulation of land-
use change and development.
Most European planning systems
have a formal structure that
reflects a hierarchical approach,
allowing national policies to be
superimposed on regional and
local ones.
Spatial planning systems in Europe

Spatial planning systems in S. Europe
Trends of the last 10 years
In many of Europe’s planning systems, the formal apparatus for articulating spatial
strategy has become discredited > more informal, cooperative means of planning.
Strategies have been ignored or have disintegrated into fragments of functionally
separated policy. In some countries, such as the Netherlands, the formal systems
continue to provide the key arenas and procedures for spatial strategy making.
In Spain and Portugal, the formal institutions and processes for plan-making have
recently been re-modelled in parallel to innovation in spatial strategy
development. The new impulse towards strategic planning has been taking place
informally, outside the formal arenas provided by the planning system itself.
In Italy, there is always a great distance between planning proposals and
implementation especially with structure planning.

Trends of the last 10 years
Whereas northern European planning promotes a more consensual and
procedural strategic shift as the right way of making places in the twenty-first
century, the southern context appears more cautious and, in some ways, opposing
the usual colonisation of ideas.
These clashes of cultures also reveal the risks implicit in the ideal of the possible
imitation and translation of ideas.
In many countries public ownership of the land, as
an indispensable condition for good planning, has
been a powerful myth.
Sustainable development has been at the basis of
most planning visions in the last decades. It may be
an increasing concern in northern European
countries, but not yet strong in southern ones.

How they do it
Strategic spatial planning processes

Cities, urban regions or metropolitan areas have become central to
ensuring a sustainable future >
To address economic, social and environmental issues > strategic
spatial planning has been increasingly undertaken by local
governments in Europe and worldwide since the 1990s.
Take-home message
Key consideration
The common objective of SSP has been the identification of a
coherent > long-term (15/20/50 years) > spatial development
strategy to frame the development of urban regions, in connection
with specific strategic territorial development projects.
(Hersperger et al. 2019)
How they do it
Strategic spatial planning processes

Strategic spatial planning (SSP)
Strategic spatial planning is a public-sector-led socio-spatial process
through which a vision, actions, and means for implementation are
produced that shape and frame what a place is and may become.
Common definition
(Albrechts 2004)
• It must take a critical view of the environment;
• It studies the external trends, forces and resources available;
• It identifies and gathers major stakeholders (public and private);
• It allows for a broad multilevel governance and diverse (public,
economic, civil society) involvement during the planning process;
• It develops a long-term vision or perspective and strategies at different
levels, considering the power structures;
• It designs plan-making for influencing and managing spatial change;
• It incorporates monitoring, feedback, and revision > action plans

Examples of strategic spatial plans
(Source)
(Source)
Vienna 2025
(Source)
(Source)

Spatial dimension of SSPs: Urban regions
(Oliveira, 2018)

Edmonton, Canada
Portland, Oregon, USA
Singapore

Qatar National Vision 2030 Saudi Arabia 2030
Critique,
mainly because there is no consolidate planning practice > “copycat” of models
“Dubaization trap” (Parnell et al 2014)
Silicon Somewhere (Hospers 2006)

(Oliveira, 2016)
The six key focal points of
strategic spatial planning

In-depth case study + participatory research in 21 European urban regions
Plan-making phase Plan-implementation phase
How strategic spatial planning contributes to the
development of urban regions
(Hersperger et al. 2018; Oliveira and Hersperger, 2018; Hersperger et al., 2019).
Regional geography issues

Strategic spatial-plan making phase
(Hersperger et al., 2019).

Dublin urban region, Ireland
Dublin
Plan Making

‘The objective of regional spatial
and economic strategies shall be to
support the implementation of the
National Spatial Strategy and the
economic policies and objectives of
the Government by providing a long-
term strategic planning and economic
framework for the development of the
region...’
(Planning and Development Act 2000)
‘it is necessary to learn from past
experiences and set out a new way
forward’
‘Ireland 2040 will be aligned with and
supported by improved investment and
governance arrangements’
Plan Making

Strategic urban projects
Strategic Development Zones (SDZs) were established in planning
legislation in 2000. They enable government to designate certain parcels of
land for a fast track planning process where the development of those
lands is considered to be of strategic importance.
Plan Making

Governance arrangements, funding mechanisms and
power configurations in SSP
Illustration of the components involved
in a strategic spatial plan-making phase
To truly grasp SSP processes it is necessary to go beyond multi-actor
involvement and inter-scalar government cooperation.
> It is necessary to scrutinize the funding sources, investigate who
wins and who loses while negotiations are happening, and how
planning decisions are made.
(Oliveira and Hersperger, 2018)

Examples: plan-making phase
(Oliveira et al 2018)

An illustration: Milan Porta Nuova-Garibaldi-Repubblica
The plan implementation phase
in strategic spatial planning (Italy)
Milan
local
authority
• 2000s: International investment funds (e.g.
Hines, Catella), national bank groups
(Unicredit)
• Idea to re-launch the area with
“skyscrapers”, new Milan CBD
Weak binding
character of the
2006, 2016 strategic
spatial plans
Milan metropolitan
authority
• Resistances from local community
(Quartiere Isola)
• Academic contribution of Boeri’s
“bosco verticale”
• The “governance community”
sustaining Milan/Lombardy
• 1953, 1983 local urban plans
• 1980s strategic documents: Documento delle
aree dismesse, Documento del Progetto
Passante
• 1980s-2000s: legal trial with local developer
• 2000s: Programma Integrato di Intervento (PII),
first with “Milan Fashion District”
• 2000s-2010s: transit
infrastructures transit
infrastructures
(Stazione Porta Garibaldi,
metro)
• 2000s-2010s: new
headquarters in the
proximity of the area
Left-wing Milan city
council supported
previous decisions of
right-wing council
Right-wing Milan
city council
2008 Financial
crisis

Example: The Finger Plan of Copenhagen
consolidated planning practice
1947 2015

Strategic spatial planning
(Source)
The Greater Copenhagen area is divided
into four geographical areas:
1) the core urban region,
2) the peripheral region > the city fingers
3) the green wedges, and
4) the rest of the Greater Copenhagen
Cities and green
wedges
Cities and transport
infrastructure
The right business in the right
place

• The traditional approaches of statutory land-use planning have
been found insufficient in tackling with the complex problems they
are facing.
• Cities and urban regions have an increasing need to orientate
themselves in global competition.
• New challenges: environmental issues, quality of life, global
competition, social cohesion…
• Regionalization and polycentrification that transcends institutional
boundaries.
• The diversification and fragmentation of agency constellations,
including the establishment of network governance arrangements
with non-government actors, and transcalar governance
structures, alongside the existing institutions of government.
Why Strategic spatial planning

The characteristics of strategic spatial planning
according to Albrechts and Balducci 2013
Comprehensive planning —› Planning based on visionary selectivity
Plan orientation (“blueprint planning”) —› Action orientation
Static problem descriptions (‘being’) —› Dynamic problem descriptions (‘becoming’)
Illusion of certainty —› Acting in the face of uncertainty
Essentialist zoning and hierarchies —› Relational networking and coproduction
Fixed governance contexts —› Changing governance contexts
STATUTORY LAND-USE PLANNING STRATEGIC SPATIAL PLANNING
(Oliveira et al 2018)

2021 Between conformative and performative

2021
• Conformative planning, the most traditional and widespread in the
world since the time of the formation of the modern state, allocates
land use and spatial development rights through a preventive binding
zoning of a comprehensive urban area, so that the delivery of building
permits is subject to the control of the proposed development projects
in terms of conformity;
• Performative planning, established in the United Kingdom (UK),
Ireland and some Commonwealth countries since the post-war period,
pivots on indicative and nonbinding zoning for the comprehensive
urban area, so that rights for land use and for spatial development are
assigned contextually with the possible delivery of the building permit
(once the public authority has positively assessed the project’s
capacity to perform the public strategy);
Between conformative and performative

Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain but also Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, are still
inspired by a conformative planning model, although the prevalence of
binding urban plans is here compensated by the recurrent use of specific
variants and other devices (strategic spatial planning as guidelines) that
allow the plans to be modified over time.
The 1995 Turin city plan in Italy has so far been subject to around 400
variants. Furthermore, in many Italian municipalities the ‘variation
request’ is now commonplace, so that every citizen or person who has an
interest in it can present projects that differ from the plan.
Spatial planning in Southern European countries the proximity to a
conformative planning model seems to be mainly due to a path-
dependence (consolidated planning practice) on respective administrative
traditions and technical cultures
2021 (-) rigidity and binding (+) citizen participation

2021
• The overall formal structure of planning systems and territorial governance is
consistent across Southern Europe with governments managing rights to
develop through a hierarchy of planning instruments and development
regulation.
• Governments use spatial planning to manage spatial or territorial
development and to engage stakeholders and citizens in that process.
• There is considerable variation in the precise arrangements of instruments
and procedures which tends to reflect the legal and administrative structure
of government (e.g., more central in PT).
• There is strong consistency in the way that countries are reforming planning,
particularly to reduce the administrative burden of decision making by
simplifying plan and regulation procedures; and to provide more speedy
decisions and certainty in the system.
(-) administrative burden (+) fast-planning

Spatial
planning
systems in
Europe
Public authority assigns the rights to use
and develop the land through the more
traditional method of binding general
plans, but with the recurrent use of
variants that can subsequently modify
them. Spatial development is generally
driven by the market, although by very
different degrees in terms of control by
the state. The general tendency is that
the capacity of public control is
relatively stronger in the countries of
Southern Europe

Spatial planning systems in practice

Transboundary spatial planning in Portugal (soft spaces)

Principle of integrated spatial planning in Portugal

Principle of
integrated spatial
planning in Lisbon
Metropolitan
Area
As in Spain, Greece and Italy the prime
principle is exploring synergies between
multiple sectors and more traditional spatial
planning e.g., strategic spatial planning (i.e.,
multi-sector; multi-governance)

Principle of
integrated spatial
planning in Lisbon
Metropolitan
Area
Principle of
integrated spatial
planning in Lisbon
Metropolitan
Area
Because comparison matters in regional geography

Possible exam question
• Spatial planning systems in Europe have evolved in recent years, including
across Southern Europe (SE). Based on insights from Berisha et al. 2021 how do
you define spatial planning in SE?
• If you were involved in a consultation process organized by Schleswig-Holstein
State authorities for spatial planning how would you carry out a new or revised
strategic spatial planning process? What prime principles would you apply?
Negotiation
Plan
Trust Decision
Leadership
Territorial governance
in spatial planning

Lecture 1 - Introduction: economic geography and its recent paradigms

4_Lecture_Planning and Planning systems of Southern Europe

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to 4_Lecture_Planning and Planning systems of Southern Europe

Similar to 4_Lecture_Planning and Planning systems of Southern Europe (20)

More from Private

More from Private (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

4_Lecture_Planning and Planning systems of Southern Europe