Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding Metropolitan Policies from Comparative–Interpretive Perspective

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
European Dimension of Metropolitan Policies

Part of the book series: Springer Geography ((SPRINGERGEOGR))

  • 347 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter clarifies the methodological and epistemological choices contributing to understanding the change of metropolitan policies in a multilevel context. Therefore, the conceptual and theoretical framework introduced in the previous chapters represents points of departure by mapping out an understanding of the Europeanisation of metropolitan policies as involving circular processes of learning and reframing, emphasising the role of competing understandings of the metropolitan regions and related spatial concepts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    According to Dryzek (1982, pp. 321–322), a complex situation is defined by a pluralistic decision process made up of a multiplicity of actors and interests. Within this process, values are conflicting and uncertain; typically, there will be little consensus on the problem definition and agenda.

  2. 2.

    This contrasting of empirical and theoretical frames or concepts corresponds to the hermeneutic–interpretive approach of congruence analysis described below in Sect. 4.2.1.

  3. 3.

    While metropolitan and urban policies are not considered as equivalent, the challenges and pitfalls of comparing urban policies apply to the comparison of metropolitan regions and their policies as well.

  4. 4.

    See an overview of further epistemological and ontological debates in urban studies Brenner and Schmid (2015) or Scott and Storper (2015).

  5. 5.

    Yanow (2000, pp. 20ff) similarly advises analysing issue architectures by, first, identifying artefacts as carriers of meaning perceived by, second, communities of meaning relevant to the policy issue. The third step identifies how meanings are communicated and the fourth, the relevant conflicts over meaning.

  6. 6.

    See also Leech (2002) advising the formulation of open-ended questions.

  7. 7.

    The interview guidelines’ questions were structured in blocks and adapted to the specific setting of the interviews and case studies. If possible, the interview questions were translated in order to conduct the interviews in the ‘natural’ or working language of the respondent.

  8. 8.

    See also Beamer (2016, p. 88) on measuring abstract or cognitive concepts in interviews.

  9. 9.

    In order to analyse understandings of metropolitan regions and related spatial concepts, the case studies take into account metropolitan policies’ spatial characteristics and implications. Therefore, cartographic representations (Dühr 2007, 2015) or visual representations of spatial concepts (van Duinen 2004) of metropolitan policies would offer an interesting object for analysis. Due to practical considerations and questions of capacity, the analysis will focus on verbal representations and concepts in policy documents, while maps and other visual representations will be consulted mainly for illustrative purposes.

  10. 10.

    Hajer (2005, pp. 306f, 2006, p. 73) and Yanow (2006) suggest similar interpretive steps to the four named in the introduction to Sect. 4.4.

References

  • Aberbach JD, Rockman BA (2002) Conducting and coding elite interviews. APSC 35:673–676. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096502001142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amin A, Graham S (1997) The ordinary city. Trans Inst Br Geog 22:411–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1997.00411.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auerbach CF, Silverstein LB (2003) Qualitative data: an introduction to coding and analysis, 1st edn. Qualitative studies in psychology. New York University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beamer G (2016) Elite interviews and state politics research. State Polit Policy Q 2:86–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244000200200106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blatter J, Blume T (2008) Co-variation and causal process tracing revisted: clarifying new directions in case study methodology. Qual Methods 29–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Blatter J, Janning F, Wagemann C (2007) Qualitative Politikanalyse: Eine Einführung in Forschungsansätze und Methoden, 1st edn, vol 44. VS, Verl. für Sozialwiss., Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhme K, Richardson T, Dabinett G, Jensen OB (2004) Values in a vacuum? Towards an integrated multi-level analysis of the governance of European space. European briefing. Eur Plan Stud 12:1175–1188

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohnsack R (2014) Rekonstruktive Sozialforschung: Einführung in qualitative Methoden, 9., überarb. und erw. Aufl. UTB, 8242: Erziehungswissenschaft, Sozialwissenschaft. Budrich, Opladen, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner N (2003) Stereotypes, archetypes, and prototypes: three uses of superlatives in contemporary urban studies. City Community 2:205–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6040.00051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner N (2004) New state spaces: urban governance and the rescaling of statehood. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner N, Schmid C (2015) Towards a new epistemology of the urban? City 19:151–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2015.1014712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunnell TIM, Maringanti A (2010) Practising urban and regional research beyond metrocentricity. Int J Urban Reg Res 34:415–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00988.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrnes JP (1992) Categorizing and combining theories of cognitive development and learning. Educ Psychol Rev 4:309–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell S (2003) Case studies in planning: comparative advantages and the problem of generalization. www.caup.umich.edu/workingpapers

  • Carmel E (1999) Concepts, context and discourse in a comparative case study. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2:141–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/136455799295104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checkel JT (2001) Social construction and European integration. In: Christiansen T, Jørgensen KE, Wiener A (eds) The social construction of Europe. Sage, London, Thousand Oaks, Calif, pp 50–64

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Copper S (1986) Do you know what I mean? Problems in the methodology of cross-cultural comparison. In: Masser I, Williams RH (eds) Learning from other countries: the cross-national dimension in urban policy-making. Geo Books, Norwich, UK, pp 65–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Denters B, Mossberger K (2006) Building blocks for a methodology for comparative urban political research. Urban Affairs Rev 41:550–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087405282607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek J (1982) Policy analysis as a hermeneutic activity. Policy Sci 14:309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dühr S (2007) The visual language of spatial planning: exploring cartographic representations for spatial planning in Europe. Routledge, London, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dühr S (2015) Analysing cartographic representations in spatial planning. In: Silva EA, Healey P, Harris N (eds) The Routledge handbook of planning research methods. Routledge, New York, pp 192–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough N (2003) Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social research. Routledge, London, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fereday J, Muir-Cochrane E (2006) Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods 5:80–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (1998) Beyond empiricism: policy inquiry in post positivist perspective. Policy Stud J 26:129–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1998.tb01929.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2003) Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford [u.a.]

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2007) Policy analysis in critical perspective: the epistemics of discursive practices. Crit Policy Stud 1:97–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2007.9518510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F, Forester J (eds) (1993) The Argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick U (2006) Experteninterviews. In: Flick U (ed) Qualitative Evaluationsforschung: Konzepte - Methoden - Umsetzung, Originalausg. Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag, Reinbek bei Hamburg, pp 218–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg B (2006) Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qual Inq 12:219–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman R, Maybin J (2011) Documents, practices and policy. Evid Policy J Res Debate Pract 7:155–170. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426411X579207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George AL, Bennett A (2005) Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. BCSIA studies in international security. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerring J (2007) Case study research: principles and practices. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajer MA (2005) Coalitions, practices, and meanings in environmental politics: from acid rain to BSE. In: Howarth DR, Torfing J (eds) Discourse theory in European politics: identity, policy, and governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York, pp 297–315

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hajer MA (2006) Doing discourse analysis: coalitions, practices, meaning. In: van den Brink M, Metze T (eds) Words matter in policy and planning: discourse theory and method in the social sciences. Koninklijk Nederlands Aardrijkskundig Genootschap; Netherlands Graduate School of Urban and Regional Research, Utrecht, pp 65–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajer MA, Wagenaar H (eds) (2003) Deliberative policy analysis: understanding governance in the network society. Reprinted. Theories of institutional design. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hantrais L (1999) Contextualization in cross-national comparative research. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2:93–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/136455799295078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haverland M (2010) If similarity is the challenge—congruence analysis should be part of the answer. Eur Polit Sci 9:68–73. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2009.47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinelt H, Bertrana X (eds) (2011) The second tier of local government in Europe: provinces, counties, départements and Landkreise in comparison. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jazeel T, McFarlane C (2007) Responsible learning: cultures of knowledge production and the north-south divide. Antipode 39:781–789. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2007.00559.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantor P, Savitch HV (2005) How to study comparative urban development politics: a research note. Int J Urban Reg Res 29:135–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00575.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelle U, Kluge S (2008) Vom Einzelfall zum Typus: Fallvergleich und Fallkontrastierung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung, 2., aktualis. Aufl. Qualitative Sozialforschung. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Leech BL (2002) Asking questions: techniques for semistructured interviews. APSC 35:665–668. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096502001129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitner H, Sheppard E (2016) Provincializing critical urban theory: extending the ecosystem of possibilities. Int J Urban Reg 40:228–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane C (2010) The Comparative City: Knowledge, Learning, Urbanism. Inter J Urban Reg Res, 34:725–742. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00917.x

  • Meuser M, Nagel U (2011) Experteninterview. In: Bohnsack R, Marotzki W, Meuser M (eds) Hauptbegriffe Qualitative Sozialforschung. Leske + Budrich, Opladen, pp 57–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM (1984) Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: toward a shared craft. Educ Res 13:20–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X013005020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J (2014) Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Münch S (2010) Integration durch Wohnungspolitik? Zum Umgang mit ethnischer Segregation im europäischen Vergleich, 1st edn. VS Verl. für Sozialwiss, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Münch S (2015) Interpretative policy-analyse: Eine Einführung, Aufl. 2016. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Nijman J (2015) The theoretical imperative of comparative urbanism: a commentary on ‘cities beyond compare?’ by Jamie Peck. Reg Stud 49:183–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.986908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nullmeier F (2012) Interpretative Policy-Forschung und das Erklärungsproblem: Oder: Wie kann man diskursiven Wandel erklären? In: Egner B, Haus M, Terizakis G (eds) Regieren: Festschrift für Hubert Heinelt. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 37–56

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Peck J (2015) Cities beyond compare? Reg Stud 49:160–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.980801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips N, Hardy C (2002) Discourse analysis: investigating processes of social construction. Qualitative research methods, vol 50. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickvance CG (1986) Comparative urban analysis and assumptions about causality. Int J Urban Reg Res 10:162–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.1986.tb00010.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2006) Ordinary cities: between modernity and development. Routledge, London, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2011a) Cities in a world of cities: the comparative gesture. Int J Urban Reg Res 35:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00982.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2011b) Comparisons: colonial or cosmopolitan? Singap J Trop Geogr 32:125–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9493.2011.00423.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson J (2014) Introduction to a virtual issue on comparative urbanism. Int J Urban Reg Res n/a-n/a. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12171

  • Roy A (2011) Slumdog cities: rethinking subaltern urbanism. Int J Urban Reg Res 35:223–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2011.01051.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurugger S (2013) Constructivism and public policy approaches in the EU: from ideas to power games. J Eur Public Policy 20:888–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2013.781826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz-Shea P (2006) Judging quality: evaluative criteria and epistemic communities. In: Yanow D, Schwartz-Shea P (eds) Interpretation and method: empirical research methods and the interpretive turn, 2nd ed. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y, pp 89–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz-Shea P, Yanow D (2012) Interpretive research design: concepts and processes. Routledge series on interpretive methods, Routledge, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott AJ, Storper M (2015) The nature of cities: the scope and limits of urban theory. Int J Urban Reg 39:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellers JM (2005) Re-placing the nation: an agenda for comparative urban politics. Urban Affairs Rev 40:419–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087404272673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard E, Leitner H, Maringanti A, Maringanti A (2013) Provincializing global urbanism: a manifesto. Urban Geogr 34:893–900. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2013.807977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soss J (2006) Talking our way to meaningful explanations: a practice-centred view of interviewing for interpretive research. In: Yanow D, Schwartz-Shea P (eds) Interpretation and method: empirical research methods and the interpretive turn, 2nd ed. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y., pp 127–149

    Google Scholar 

  • St. Pierre EA, Jackson AY (2014) Qualitative data analysis after coding. Qual Inq 20:715–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800414532435

  • van Duinen L (2004) Planning imagery: the emergence and development of new planning concepts in Dutch national spatial policy. Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Academische Proefschrift

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar H (2011) Meaning in action: interpretation and dialogue in policy analysis. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward K (2008) Editorial—toward a comparative (re)turn in urban studies? Some reflections. Urban Geogr 29:405–410. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.29.5.405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward K (2010) Towards a relational comparative approach to the study of cities. Prog Hum Geogr 34:471–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132509350239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss RS (1995) Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies, 1st Free Press, pbk edn. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D (1996) How does a policy mean?: Interpreting policy and organizational actions. Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D (2000) Conducting interpretive policy analysis. Qualitative research methods, vol 47. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, Calif

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D (2003) Accessing local knowledge. In: Hajer MA, Wagenaar H (eds) Deliberative policy analysis: understanding governance in the network society, Reprinted. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp 228–246

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D (2006) Thinking interpretively: philosophical presuppositions and the human sciences. In: Yanow D, Schwartz-Shea P (eds) Interpretation and method: empirical research methods and the interpretive turn, 2nd edn. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, pp 5–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D (2014) Interpretive analysis and comparative research. In: Engeli I, Allison CR (eds) Comparative policy studies: conceptual and methodological challenges. Palgrave Macmillan, [Basingstoke], pp 131–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanow D, Schwartz-Shea P (eds) (2006) Interpretation and method: empirical research methods and the interpretive turn, 2nd edn. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (2014) Case study research: design and methods, 5th edn. Sage, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Geography, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany

    Carola Fricke

Authors
  1. Carola Fricke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carola Fricke .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fricke, C. (2020). Understanding Metropolitan Policies from Comparative–Interpretive Perspective. In: European Dimension of Metropolitan Policies. Springer Geography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14614-6_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation