Reading EUropean borderlands under the perspective of legal geography and spatial justice

in European Planning Studies (2021)

Recently, the notion of spatial justice has been discussed as a possible conceptual foundation for rethinking EU Cohesion Policy. While scholars have adopted a dual distributive and procedural ... [more ▼]

Recently, the notion of spatial justice has been discussed as a possible conceptual foundation for rethinking EU Cohesion Policy. While scholars have adopted a dual distributive and procedural understanding of spatial justice, the paper argues that, applied to cross-border areas, such a conceptualisation is challenged to explain how the border contributes to disparities. We argue that actively questioning the role of law is paramount for better examination of the dynamics within border areas. An understanding of spatial justice informed by legal geography allows examination of how law fosters and impedes movement across borders. The paper presents three recent examples where policy representatives from affected communities have fought to adapt legal provisions to cross-border spatiality. Whether such initiatives increased border communities’ capacities to shape their own development (i.e. European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation) or not yet (i.e. co-development at the Lorraine-Luxembourg border; European Cross-Border Mechanism), these examples show that analysing EUropean borderlands as a spatiolegal category helps understanding of how space and law constantly struggle with one another, and how spatial justice emerges from a movement out of this conflict. The paper concludes by discussing the practical and conceptual implications of combining legal geography and spatial justice for analysing EU Borderlands. [less ▲]

Cross-Border Cooperation in Europe: A relational perspective

in European Planning Studies (2020), 28(1), 1-7

Cross-border cooperation, border regions, soft spaces? This special issue approaches cross-border informal planning processes in cross-border regions by analysing them from a perspective that combines ... [more ▼]

Cross-border cooperation, border regions, soft spaces? This special issue approaches cross-border informal planning processes in cross-border regions by analysing them from a perspective that combines networks, governance and territorialization. Such a relational perspective will be developed by papers which deal with a variety of European cross-border regions and empirical evidence related to the nexus of networks, governance and territorialization. [less ▲]

Discourse Yes, Implementation Maybe: an Immobility and Paralysis of Sustainable Development Policy

in European Planning Studies (2014), 22(9), 1824-1840

Sustainable development policies are on the move. Cities the world over are reposition-ing, repackaging and remarketing themselves as green and sustainable, and sustainable development is the moniker ... [more ▼]

Sustainable development policies are on the move. Cities the world over are reposition-ing, repackaging and remarketing themselves as green and sustainable, and sustainable development is the moniker imported to spark the process. At the same time, sustainable development, as a normative point of departure, is itself going through cycles of reinterpretation and re-composition. The research in this paper aims to understand this process by mapping the trajectories of sustainable development policies, and understanding sustainable development as a contextually grounded policy in motion. In Luxembourg, as planners are confronted with finding ways to manage growth, sustainable development has come to permeate all levels of the planning system. To understand how this came into being, research methods were employed that include document screening and a series of conversational interviews that were later transcribed and coded. In so doing, the discourse around sustainable development policy could be reconstructed and analysed. The results showed that the multi-scalar, cross-national, and simultaneously micro-level governance structures pose many obstructions to the implementation of sustainable development policies that are imported from abroad. Thus, policy is ultimately immobile, and a policy paralysis can be spoken of. [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 ▲]