Spatial Development in Luxembourg: Mimetic Evolution or Emergence of a New Planning Culture?

in European Planning Studies (2015), 23(3), 509-528

Luxembourg’s planning system is currently undergoing a fundamental reform with the establishment of completely new structures in some parts of it. The present paper reflects these developments in the ... [more ▼]

Luxembourg’s planning system is currently undergoing a fundamental reform with the establishment of completely new structures in some parts of it. The present paper reflects these developments in the following steps: We start by proposing a heuristic based on the planning culture perspective originally developed by Frank Othengrafen and colleagues, taking into account (a) planning artefacts, (b) the planning environment, and (c) the societal environment. Before we subsume the contemporary developments of the planning system we provide a brief description of Luxembourg’s spatial context which, due to the country’s small size and the high growth rates of its economy and population in the past years, displays a number of peculiar features. Applying the planning culture perspective on the planning system and its societal context reveals not only hybrid characteristics with regard to neighbouring systems. It also provides the important characteristics of the small state and shows the limits of the planning culture perspective. [less ▲]

Spatial integration revisited - new insights for cross-border and transnational contexts

in ESPON in support of European Territorial Development and Cohesion (2014, February)

Die räumliche Perspektive der Europäischen Union: Territorialität, Subsidiarität, Finalität?

in Österreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft. Mitteilungen (2013), 155

The paper reflects the territorial perspective of the European Union and starts with the reference to three strands of debates that are currently active on the interface of political geography and ... [more ▼]

The paper reflects the territorial perspective of the European Union and starts with the reference to three strands of debates that are currently active on the interface of political geography and European law. First, since the 1990s we see a debate on a possible competence on the European level for spatial planning. In this context, the principle of subsidiarity is discussed controversially. Second, the debate on EU enlargements refers to the concept of finality. Third, we refer to the discussion on the principle of territoriality. Prevailing on the national level, this principle is very much disputed on the European level.We confront this very political debate. The starting point is here the discussion on the principle of territoriality which can be considered as the most comprehensive one.In a first step we differentiate between analytical and normative elements of the debate. In a second step we propose a categorisation that comprises territorial, moderate relational and radical relational approaches. In a last step, we position the concepts of subsidiarity and finality to the different understanding of territoriality. [less ▲]

On the Territoriality of Cross-Border Cooperation: “Institutional Mapping” in a Multi-Level Context

in European Planning Studies (2012), 20(6), 961-980

Territoriality is mostly discussed as the political competence to exert control on a certain space, in particular with regard to the nation state. Globalization and European Integration have initiated ... [more ▼]

Territoriality is mostly discussed as the political competence to exert control on a certain space, in particular with regard to the nation state. Globalization and European Integration have initiated some debate on this understanding, but cross-cross-border cooperation has rarely been linked to this debate. In these areas enormous political changes have been seen during the recent years. Still, the territorial dimension cannot be addressed, as territoriality as known from nation states is challenging politics. However, the territorial implications are manifold and are increasing throughout Europe. Against this backdrop is conceptual reflection. This paper starts with a brief overview of discussions and the empirical implementation of the territoriality debate. Based on this, the paper attempts to catch up with the political changes – the reflection of cross-border territorialities in a two-fold way. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to this field. First, we propose a methodological approach to study the essential aspects. We study from a conceptual point of view, the dimensions of territoriality in cross-border contexts. These are explored as well as the political-juridical background of cross-border cooperation. Based on this, a C-B-IM-tool (Cross-Border Institutional Mapping) has been introduced, involving three steps: (a) (a1) multi-level mapping of cross-border institutions, (b) (a2) mapping of policy arenas and (c) (a3) mapping of the political topography in the sense of going beyond formalized and codified governance patterns. Secondly, with the example of the Greater Region around Luxembourg, the empirical and conceptual findings on cross-border territoriality are illustrated. We can state an establishing cross-border territoriality that does not replace domestic, state-centric territorialities but that inserts new and complex elements of a multi-level territoriality system. [less ▲]