Author:
Atkinson Rob,Pacchi Carolina
Abstract
Territorial cohesion has figured in the lexicon of the European Union for some years. However, there has never been a clear definition of the notion, not even after its inclusion in the Lisbon Treaty. Moreover, within the European Union Cohesion Reports and, more generally, within European Union documents, along with the other two dimensions of cohesion (economic and social) it has been treated separately without any serious attempts to reconcile them and develop a coherent interpretation of cohesion—the result being the creation of a contested and ill-defined understanding of territorial cohesion and its relationship to the other two dimensions of Cohesion Policy. Given that the approach advocated by Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy aims to embed the different dimensions and how they interact in specific spatial configurations (created by the confluence of a range of different ‘flows’ that can create multiple overlapping assemblages with ‘fuzzy’ boundaries), this raises important questions about how we understand these relationships. Moreover, the policy discourses in which each dimension of cohesion is situated create their own frameworks that are conducive to developing the conditions, including appropriate policy strategies, to supporting these individual cohesion formations. The rather arbitrary separation of these approaches in ‘official discourse’ impedes addressing cohesion in a coherent and integrated manner. Thus, after reviewing the relevant key policy literature, the article will seek to consider how territorial cohesion relates to the other two dimensions of cohesion taking into account the role of the place-based approach. However, it is argued that the search for territorial (social and economic) cohesion has been subordinated to neoliberal notions such as competitiveness and economic growth.
Subject
Sociology and Political Science,Social Psychology
Reference44 articles.
1. Agenzia per la Coesione Territoriale. (2013). Strategia nazionale per le Aree interne: Definizione, obiettivi, strumenti e governance (Documento tecnico collegato alla bozza di Accordo di Partenariato trasmessa alla CE il 9 dicembre 2013) National strategy for internal areas: Definition, objectives, tools and governance (Technical document linked to the draft Partnership Agreement sent to the European Commission on 9 December 2013)]. Rome: Agenzia per la Coesione Territoriale.
2. Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2014). The evolution and trajectories of English spatial governance: ‘Neoliberal’ episodes in planning. Planning Practice & Research, 28(1), 6–26.
3. Atkinson, R. (1999). Discourses of partnership and empowerment in contemporary British urban regeneration. Urban Studies, 36, 59–72.
4. Atkinson, R. (2000). Narratives of the inner city: The construction of urban problems and urban policy in the official discourse of British government, 1968–1998. Critical Social Policy, 20(2), 211–232.
5. Atkinson, R. (2001). The emerging ‘urban agenda’ and the European spatial development perspective: Towards and European Union urban policy? European Planning Studies, 9(3), 385–406.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献