The document discusses territorial governance and its role in strategic plan making and implementation. It defines territorial governance as the formulation and implementation of public policies and projects for a territory's development. Key components of territorial governance that influence strategic plan making are identified as coordination, interest groups, working agendas, citizen participation, scientific knowledge, accountability, and leadership. Case studies of 14 European urban regions find that interest groups, coordination, and working agendas primarily influence plan making, while scientific knowledge, leadership, accountability, and citizen participation play a secondary role. Additional influences include negotiation, established practices, and consensus building. When implementing plans, key influences are negotiation, multi-level cooperation, interest groups, funding, and the role of regional planners.

1. Territorial Governance

2. Territorial governance:
Refers to “the formulation and implementation of public policies, programmes and
projects for the development of a territory” (Van Well and Schmitt, 2016, p. 13). It is
thus the ACTIVITY THROUGH WHICH PLANS ARE MADE AND IMPLEMENTED.
Key aspects for SUCCESSFUL TERRITORIAL GOVERNANCE are the coordination of
interests, involvement of key players and the public, recognition of various types of
knowledge, adaptability of governance processes, accountability and recognized
leadership (e.g. Schmitt and Van Well, 2016; Rivolin et al. 2014) as well as an emphasis
on the interplay of governmental institutions from national to local scales, private
actors (e.g. firms), educational institutions (e.g. universities) and citizenry.

3. Methodology

4. Methodology (1)
Case studies of Western Europe
Document analysis of
strategic spatial plans
+
complementary documents
Interviewing regional planners and
planning experts familiar with
processes of strategic plan making
and plan implementation
What about
governance in
planning
process?

5. • 14 case studies
• Barcelona (Spain)
• Cardiff (Wales, United Kingdom)
• Copenhagen (Denmark)
• Dublin (Ireland)
• Edinburgh (Scotland)
• Hamburg (Germany)
• Hannover (Germany)
• Helsinki-Uusimaa (Finland)
• Lyon (France)
• Milan (Italy)
• Oslo-Akershus (Norway)
• Stockholm (Sweden)
• Stuttgart (Germany), and
• Vienna (Austria)
• 43 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with regional planners and planning experts familiar with processes of
strategic plan making and plan implementation
• 90 minutes each interview (in average)
• STEPS
• Interviews were 1st digitally recorded in-situ between May and November 2017
• Interviews were 2nd fully transcribed
• The transcripts and audio files were coded according to research questions defined in the research proposal
Methodology (2)

6. Case studies
14 European Urban Regions

7. Case study Organizations interviewed Discussed plans
Barcelona Àrea Metropolitana de Barcelona.
Mediaurban Agency.
Metropolitan Urban Master Plan (to be released in 2018)
with references to the General Metropolitan Plan 1976.
Cardiff Cardiff City Council.
Cardiff University.
Expert of practice in connectivity and regional
transportation.
Strategic Development Plan for the Cardiff City Region
(forthcoming) with references to the Cardiff Local
Development Plan 2006-2026, to the Cardiff Capital Region
City Deal and to South Wales Metro project.
Copenhagen Danish Business Authority.
University of Copenhagen.
Rudersdal City Council.
The Finger Plan 2015 - A Strategy for the Development of
the Greater Copenhagen Area with references to the Finger
Plan 2013 and 2007.
Dublin Dublin City Council.
Eastern and Midland Regional Assembly.
University College Dublin.
Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area
2010-2022 with references to the Dublin City Development
Plan 2016-2022.
Edinburgh City of Edinburgh Council.
The Edinburgh and South East SESplan - Scotland
Strategic Development Planning Authority.
RTPI - Royal Town Planning Institute, Scotland.
University of Dundee.
Proposed Strategic Development Plan 2016 and Edinburgh
Local Development Plan 2016 with references to the
Strategic Development Plan 2013, to the Action
Programme 2016 and to the Main Issues Report 2015.
Hamburg Hamburg Metropolitan Region.
HafenCity University Hamburg.
Regional Plan 2005 with references to the Regional
Development Concept and to the Strategic Framework
2010.
Hannover Region Hannover.
Leibniz University Hannover.
Regional Spatial Planning Program (RROP) 2016 with
references to RROP 2005.
List of the organizationsinterviewedand the discussed strategic plans (I)

8. Case study Organizations interviewed Discussed plans
Helsinki-Uusimaa City of Helsinki.
Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional Council.
Regional Land use Planning for Helsinki-Uusimaa Region
2016 with references to Helsinki City Plan - Vision 2050
Urban plan - the new Helsinki city plan.
Lyon Le Sepal - Syndicat mixte d’études et de
programmation de l’Agglomération Lyonnaise.
University Lumière Lyon
Schéma de cohérence territoriale de l'Agglomération
Lyonnaise – SCOT 2030.
Milan Città Metropolitana di Milano.
Politecnico di Milano.
Piano strategico triennale del territorio metropolitan 2016-
2018 with references to “City of cities: A project for Milan”
(see Balducci, Fedeli and Pasqui, 2011).
Oslo-Akershus Akershus County Council.
Oslo City Council.
Regional Plan for Land Use and Transport in Oslo and
Akershus 2015.
Stockholm Stockholm City Council.
Stockholm County Council.
Nordregio - Nordic Center for Spatial Development.
Regional development plan for the Stockholm region RUFS
2010 with references to the forthcoming RUFS 2050.
Stuttgart Verband Region Stuttgart.
Cardiff University (on Stuttgart).
Regional plan 2009 with references to The Stuttgart
Region's Landscape Park, the Neckar Landscape Park.
Vienna Vienna City Council.
Austrian Institute for Regional Studies and Spatial
Planning.
Vienna University of Technology.
Planning cooperation for the Spatial Development of the
City Region of Vienna, Lower Austria and Burgenland 2011
(PGO 2011) with references to STEP 2025 - Urban
Development Plan Vienna.
List of the organizationsinterviewedand the discussed strategic plans (II)

9. Conceptual and operational
framework for analysing
territorial governance in
plan making

10. The conceptualand operationalframeworkfor analysing territorial governance:
Key references
Components Academic references Policy-oriented references
Coordination Schmitt & Van Well (2016a);
Peterlin (2010);
Malone & Crowston, (1990).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
OECD (2001);
GDRC (1999).
Interest groups Foster and Barnes (2012);
Healey et al. (2006);
Burby (2003).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
Barnes et al. (2012);
Working agenda Foster & Barnes (2012);
Healey et al. (2006).
Barnes, Foster & Malakoff (2012);
GDRC (1999).
Citizen participation Buijs et al. (2017);
Kahila-Tani et al. (2017);
Davoudi et al. (2008).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
OECD (2001);
GDRC (1999).
Scientific knowledge Schmitt & Van Well (2016a);
Klijn & Koppenjan (2016);
Healey et al. (2006).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
Barnes et al. (2012) ;
GDRC (1999).
Accountability Schmitt & Van Well (2016a);
Mäntysalo et al. (2015).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
GDRC (1999).
Leadership Schmitt & Van Well (2016a);
Davoudi & Cowie (2016);
Foster & Barnes (2012).
ESPON/Nordregio (2013);
Barnes et al. (2012) ;
GDRC (1999).

11. The conceptualand operationalframeworkfor analysing territorial governance:
Definitionof key components
Components Definitions
Coordination Concerns the purposeful and collaborative alignment of the interests and perspectives of
governments (e.g. national, regional [including formal states, as in the German system],
metropolitan and municipal), of quasi-governmental organizations (e.g. chambers of commerce
and industry), of NGOs (e.g. nature protection), of educational institutions (e.g. universities,
research centres) and of for-profit organizations (e.g. retail companies and real estate
developers).
Interest groups This component reflects the groups, formally or informally constituted, that might, or might
not, share common interests regarding a specific territory or the accomplishment of a working
agenda.
Working agenda Must reflect, and comprehensively identify, what needs to be accomplished, such as ongoing
social (e.g. gentrification), economic (e.g. the need to boost jobs), cultural, housing (e.g. the
need for more social housing), planning (e.g. urban sprawl) and environmental issues (e.g.
protecting green areas), together with possible solutions to those issues, the available
resources and the relevant interest groups.
Citizen participation Citizens play a role in identifying constraints and threats, as well as in identifying opportunities
to support plan-making. Citizens contribute to the environmental, social and institutional
resilience of urban regions.
Scientific knowledge Is the knowledge produced by universities, research centres and other scientific
organizations.
Accountability Is about ensuring that those in positions of authority, for instance the chief planners of a
regional planning department, are responsible to the public for making decisions that affect
specific territories and for preparing strategic plans that reflect the interests and utmost
necessities of those territories
Leadership Is the ability to organize, coordinate and guide the actions of relevant interest groups in plan-
making. Leadership may be performed by individual actors (e.g. the director of a regional
planning department) or by whole institutions (e.g. a regional government)

12. Coordination
Interests groups
Working agendas
Civic participation
Scientific knowledge
Accountability
Leadership
Key components Field Work

13. Territorial governance
components influencing
processes of strategic
plan making

14. Territorialgovernance componentsinfluencingprocesses of strategic plan-making
in the selected 14 European urban regions
Case study*
STRONGLY
influence plan-making
WEAKLY
influence plan-making
Also influence
plan-making
Barcelona Interest groups;
Citizen participation; Leadership.
Coordination;
Working agenda; Scientific knowledge;
Accountability.
Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making.
Cardiff Coordination;
Working agenda; Interest groups;
Citizen participation.
Scientific knowledge; Leadership;
Accountability.
Negotiation.
Copenhagen Coordination;
Interest groups;
Accountability;
Scientific knowledge.
Leadership;
Citizen participation; Working agenda.
Negotiation; Consensus-
building;
Trust;
Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making.
Dublin Coordination;
Interest groups;
Scientific knowledge; Accountability.
Citizen participation; Working agenda;
Leadership.
Negotiation.
Edinburgh Interest groups;
Working agenda;
Citizen participation.
Coordination;
Scientific knowledge; Accountability;
Leadership.
Negotiation.
Hamburg Coordination;
Interest groups.
Working agenda;
Citizen participation;
Accountability;
Scientific knowledge; Leadership.
None.
Hannover Working agenda;
Coordination;
Interest groups;
Citizen participation;
Leadership;
Accountability.
Scientific knowledge; Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making;
Negotiation;
Consensus-building.

15. Case study
STRONGLY
influence plan-making
WEAKLY
influence plan-making
Also influence
plan-making
Helsinki-Uusimaa Working agenda; Coordination;
Interest groups; Citizen participation;
Scientific knowledge.
Accountability;
Leadership.
Consensus-building.
Lyon Working agenda;
Interest groups.
Coordination; Citizen participation;
Scientific knowledge; Accountability;
Leadership.
Negotiation.
Milan Coordination;
Interest groups.
Citizen participation; Scientific
knowledge; Accountability; Leadership.
Negotiation.
Oslo-Akershus Coordination; Interest groups;
Working agenda; Citizen participation;
Accountability; Leadership.
Scientific knowledge. Negotiation; Consensus-
building;
Trust.
Stockholm Interest groups;
Coordination;
Working agenda.
Citizen participation; Scientific
knowledge;
Accountability;
Leadership.
Negotiation;
Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making.
Stuttgart Coordination;
Interest groups; Accountability;
Leadership.
Citizen participation; Scientific
knowledge;
Working agenda;
Negotiation.
Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making.
Vienna Coordination;
Interest groups.
Working agenda;
Accountability;
Citizen participation; Scientific
knowledge;
Leadership.
None.
In
the
overall
context
PRIMARY ROLE
• Interest groups
• Coordination
• Working agenda
SECONDARY ROLE
• Scientific knowledge
• Leadership
• Accountability
• Citizen participation
OTHER COMPONENTS
• Negotiation
• Consolidated practices of
strategic plan-making
• Consensus-building
• Trust
Territorialgovernance componentsinfluencingprocesses of strategic plan-making
in the selected 14 European urban regions

16. Territorialgovernance componentshaving a PRIMARY ROLE in strategic plan-making
• Interest groups (in 100% of the 14 case studies);
• Coordination (in 79% of the 14 case studies);
• Working agenda (in 50% of the 14 case studies).
Territorialgovernance componentshaving a SECONDARY ROLE in strategic plan-making
• Scientific knowledge (in 79% of the 14 case studies);
• Leadership (in 71% of the 14 case studies);
• Accountability (64% of the 14 case studies);
• Citizen participation (57% of the 14 case studies).
Territorialgovernance componentsALSO INFLUENCINGplan-making
• Negotiation;
• Consolidated practices of strategic plan-making;
• Consensus-building;
• Trust

17. Main Out put
Oliveira, E. and Hersperger, A.M. (under review) Investigating the Components of
Territorial Governance Influencing Processes of Strategic Plan-Making in Urban
Regions: A European Perspective, Planning Practice & Research*

18. Territorial governance
components influencing
processes of strategic
plan implementation

19. Case study Components
Barcelona Coordination
Leadership
Cardiff Interest groups
Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Funding schemes
Copenhagen Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Role of regional planners
Dublin Interest groups
Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Funding schemes
Role of regional planners
Edinburgh Interest groups
Leadership
Negotiation
Interdepartmental cooperation
Funding schemes
Hamburg Interest groups
Leadership
Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Funding schemes
Hannover Interest groups
Coordination
Leadership
Citizen participation
Negotiation
Consensus building
Multilevel government cooperation
Interdepartmental cooperation
Funding schemes
Territorialgovernance componentsinfluencingprocesses of strategic plan implementation
Case study Components
Helsinki-Uusimaa Interest groups
Coordination
Expert knowledge
Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Action program
Lyon Interest groups
Negotiation
Multilevel government cooperation
Interdepartmental cooperation
Role of regional planners
Milan Interest groups
Multilevel government cooperation
Funding schemes
Role of regional planners
Oslo-Akershus Coordination
Negotiation
Consensus building
Multilevel government cooperation
Role of regional planners
Stockholm Interest groups
Leadership
Negotiation
Consensus building
Multilevel government cooperation
Interdepartmental cooperation
Stuttgart Leadership; Negotiation; Consensus building
Multilevel government cooperation
Funding schemes
Vienna Expert knowledge; Negotiation; Consensus
building; Multilevel government cooperation;
Interdepartmental cooperation; Role of
regional planners

20. Main territorial governance componentsinfluencingprocesses of strategic plan-
implementationin the selected 14 European urban regions
• Negotiation (12 of the 14 case studies)
• Multilevel government cooperation (12 of the 14 case studies)
• Interest groups (9 of the 14 case studies)
• Funding schemes (7 of the 14 case studies)
• Role of regional planners (6 of the 14 case studies)
• Leadership (6 of the 14 case studies)
• Consensus building (5 of the 14 case studies)

21. Main Out put
Oliveira, E. and Hersperger, A.M. (in preparation) The Role and Interrelationships of
Interest Groups, Leadership, Negotiation and Funding Schemes in processes of
Strategic Plan Implementation, Land Use Policy

22. Implementing
Strategic Regional Plans
through Urban-Regional
Development
Projects

23. Case study Examples of projects Main urban function
of the projects
The reasons for the implementation
plans through projects
Territorial governance
behind project-making
Barcelona Several urban
regeneration projects
Urban regeneration
Residential
City-making
Limited financial resources, mainly at
the municipal level.
Collaboration between
municipalities and the AMB.
Cardiff South Wales Metro. Residential
Retail
Transportation
Limited financial resources. Collaboration between the
UK and the Welsh
governments and city
councils.
Copenhagen Nordhavn & others. Residential
Retail
Transportation
Cruise tourism
Scarce land resources.
The need to repurpose outdated
harbour facilities.
Collaboration between
municipalities and the
Danish government.
Dublin North Lotts & Grand
Canal Dock Strategic
Development Zone
Planning & others.
Residential
Retail
Business
Public spaces
Transportation
Limited financial resources.
The need to repurpose outdated
harbour and industrial facilities.
Collaboration between
public authorities such as
Dublin City Council and
private interest groups
Edinburgh Several projects (names
not specified during
interviews).
Innovation hubs
Infrastructures
Residential
Cultural tourism
Limited financial resources. Collaboration between
the six local authorities and
the UK and Scottish
Governments.
Hamburg Several projects (names
not specified during
interviews).
Retail; Tourism
Culture
Transportation
Residential Green
infrastructure
Scarce land resources. Limited financial
resources at the municipal level.
Limited technical resources.
The need to repurpose outdated
harbour facilities.
Collaboration between
Hamburg Metropolitan
Region and municipalities
located in Hamburg Region.
Hannover Several projects (names
not specified during
interviews).
Residential
Transportation
Retail
Green infrastructure
Scarce land resources.
Limited financial and technical
resources at the municipal level.
The need to repurpose outdated
industrial facilities.
Collaboration between
Region Hannover and
municipalities in the region.
Examplesof projects & reasonsfor the implementation of strategic plans through projects

24. Examplesof projects & reasonsfor the implementation of strategic plans through projects
Case study Examples of projects Main urban function
of the projects
The reasons for the implementation
plans through projects
Territorial governance
behind project-making
Helsinki-Uusimaa Several projects (names
not specified during
interviews).
Residential
Transportation
Green infrastructure
Scarce land resources.
Limited financial resources at the
municipal level.
Collaboration between
Helsinki-Uusimaa Regional
Council and municipalities.
Lyon Redeveloping of Lyon
Part-Dieu district &
others on housing and
transportation.
Residential
Food; Energy
Retail; Industrial
Limited financial resources.
Scarce land resources.
Environmental preoccupations
Collaboration between
Greater Lyon and private
interest groups.
Milan Welfare project
Urban; Regeneration
project; Habitability
project.
Residential
Urban regeneration
Limited financial resources.
Scarce land resources.
Projects promoted by a
variety of interest groups.
Oslo-Akershus Several projects (names
not specified during
interviews).
Residential
Retail; Transportation
Green infrastructure
Public spaces
Scarce land resources.
Environmental preoccupations.
The need to repurpose outdated
harbour and breweries facilities.
Partnership between
Akershus County Council and
Oslo City Council.
Stockholm Stockholm Royal Seaport
& others
Residential;
Transportation; Retail
Green infrastructure
Public spaces
Scarce land resources.
Scarce built up areas.
Environmental preoccupations.
Partnership between
Stockholm City Council and
Stockholm County Council.
Stuttgart Neckar Landscape Park Green infrastructure
Public spaces;
Residential; Industrial;
Transportation
Limited financial resources at the
municipal level; Scarce land resources.
Environmental preoccupations.
Collaboration between VRS
and municipalities.
Collaboration between VRS
and private groups.
Vienna Project for reconversion
of rail facilities into
residential and
commercial areas;
Aspern Seestadt project.
Residential;
Transportation
Industrial; Green
infrastructure
Water front
regeneration
Limited financial resources.
Scarce land resources.
Scarce built up areas.
The need to repurpose outdated railway
facilities.
Partnership between Vienna
City Council and Austrian
Railway network owner
(ÖBB-Infrastruktur AG).
Other public-private
collaborations.

25. Implementing Strategic Regional Plans through Urban-RegionalDevelopment Projects
MAIN URBAN FUNCTION OF THE
PROJECTS
MAIN JUSTIFICATION FOR PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
THROUGH PROJECTS:
MAIN TYPE OF TERRITORIAL
GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS
1) Residential;
2) Transportation;
3) Green infrastructures;
4) Retail;
5) Public spaces;
6) Industrial.
1) Limited financial resources;
2) Scarce land resources;
3) Repurposing of outdated facilities;
4) Environmental preoccupations.
1) Collaborations among public entities;
2) Collaborations between public
entities and private interest groups.
RESIDENTIAL
LIMITED FINANCIAL
RESOURCES
Collaborations
among public
entities

26. Implementing Strategic Regional Plans through Urban-RegionalDevelopment Projects
Schematic representation of strategic regional plan implementation in the selected cases.
Source: Authors’ own elaboration.
STRATEGIC
REGIONAL
PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION
Urban-regional
development
projects
Local development plans
Residential
Transportation
Green infrastructures
RQ 2: Collaborations between multilevel tiers of government
Funding schemes at EU, national and regional levels
RQ 1: Scarce financial and land resources + repurposing of outdated
facilities + environmental preoccupations
Retail
Public spaces
Industrial
B
A
• RQ 1: What are the REASONS for the implementation of strategic spatial plans through urban-regional
development projects?
• RQ 2: How are the TERRITORIAL GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS behind the implementation of strategic plans
through urban-regional development PROJECTS CHARACTERIZED?

27. Examples of Plan Implementation through Projects
A snapshot of an urban running track in central Barcelona as an example of a small scale city-
making project.
Source. Authors’ own photograph. Date. November 2016.
Barcelona
• Urban regeneration
• Residential
• City-making
Main urban function of the projects

28. Cardiff
South Wales Metro project for integration of heavy rail and development of light rail and bus-based
public transport services and systems.
Source. Extracted with authorization from “A Cardiff Capital Region Metro: Impact Study October
2013”.
• Residential
• Retail
• Transportation
Main urban function of
the projects

29. Copenhagen
A snapshot of central Copenhagen from above where is possible to identify
constructions cranes on the site of the Nordhavn project area.
Source. Authors’ own. Date. September 2016.
• Residential;
• Retail;
• Transportation;
• Cruise tourism;
Main urban function of the projects

30. Dublin
A snapshot of a construction site near to the Strategic Development Zone (SDZ) - Dublin
Docklands.
Source. Authors’ own. Date. September 2016.
• Residential;
• Retail;
• Business;
• Public spaces;
• Transportation.
Main urban function of the projects

31. Edinburgh
A snapshot of a residential development in city centre of Edinburgh.
Source. Authors’ own. Date. September 2016.
• Innovation hubs;
• Infrastructures;
• Residential;
• Cultural tourism.
Main urban function of the projects

32. Oslo-Akershus
A snapshot of a construction site in the surrounding area of the Barcode project at Oslo city
centre.
Source. Authors’ own. Date. August 2016.
• Residential;
• Retail;
• Transportation;
• Green infrastructure;
• Public spaces.
Main urban function of the projects

33. Stockholm
A snapshot of an improvement of transport network in Stockholm city centre.
Source. Authors’ own. Date. July 2016.
• Residential;
• Transportation;
• Retail;
• Green infrastructure;
• Public spaces.
Main urban function of the projects

34. Vienna
A snapshot of a construction site in the Aspern Seestadt urban-regional development project.
Source. Extracted with authorization from Wien 3420 Aspern Development AG. available at
http://www.aspern-seestadt.at/
• Residential;
• Transportation
• Industrial;
• Green infrastructure;
• Water front regeneration.
Main urban function of the projects

35. Main Out put
Oliveira, E. and Hersperger, M.A. (2017) Overcoming Resource Scarcity by
Implementing Strategic Regional Plans through Urban-Regional Development
Projects: A European Perspective, Paper accepted for presentation during the ASEOP
congress, 11-14 July, Lisbon, Portugal.