Advertisement

Constructing Metropolitan Imaginaries: Who Does This and Why?

  • Patricia FeiertagEmail author
  • John Harrison
  • Valeria Fedeli
Chapter

Abstract

A growing variety of actors has been producing imaginaries of metropolitan regions corresponding to their interests. The cast has been opened up from planners, academics, and local–regional–national state actors to international actors, think tanks, and management consultancies, leading to a greater variety of sometimes short-lived, competing imaginaries. The chapter aims to interrogate the motivations of the social actors actively involved in constructing the vision(s) over time. We use various examples of the European Union, German national spatial visions, Atlantic Gateway in the UK, the megaregions concept, and an expert competition the metropolitan region of Helsinki. We argue that creating spatial imaginaries is not a primary realm for planners, thus on the one hand less transported by plans or even cartographic representations of a metropolitan region and on the other hand less comprehensive as some of them follow a single purpose such as justifying infrastructure investment.

Keywords

Spatial imaginary Actors Interest Metropolitan regions Metropolitan imaginaries 

References

  1. Ache, P. (2011). ‘Creating futures that would otherwise not be’—Reflections on the Greater Helsinki Vision process and the making of metropolitan regions. Progress in Planning, 75(4), 155–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2017). Seeing Like a city. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  3. Barnett, C., & Parnell, S. (2016). Ideas, implementation and indicators: Epistemologies of the post-2015 urban agenda. Environment and Urbanization, 28(1), 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BBSR [Federal Institute for Building, Urban and Regional Research]. (2012). Raumordnungsbericht [Spatial planning report] 2011. BBSR: Bonn.Google Scholar
  5. BMBau [Federal Ministry for Regional Planning, Building and Urban Development]. (1993). Raumordnungspolitischer Orientierungsrahmen [Spatial planning policy orientation]. Bonn: BMBau.Google Scholar
  6. EMA [European Metropolitan Associations]. (2017). Warsaw declaration. http://www.um.warszawa.pl/ema2017/Warsaw_Declaration_2017_10_20.pdf?20180825211359. Accessed March 13, 2019.
  7. Fedeli, V., Feiertag, P., & Harrison, J. (2020). Invoking new metropolitan imaginaries: What type of metropolitan region for what kind of metropolitan planning and governance? In K. Zimmermann, D. Galland, & J. Harrison (Eds.), Metropolitan regions, planning and governance (pp. 173–192). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Grazi, L. (2007). L’Europa e le città: la questione urbana nel processo di integrazione europea, 1957–1999 [Europe and cities: the urban issue in the process of European integration, 1957–1999]. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
  9. Harrison, J. (2014). Rethinking city-regionalism as the production of new non-state spatial strategies: The case of Peel Holdings Atlantic Gateway Strategy. Urban Studies, 51(11), 2315–2335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrison, J., & Growe, A. (2014a). From places to flows? Planning for the new ‘regional world’ in Germany. European and Urban Regional Studies, 21(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harrison, J., & Growe, A. (2014b). When regions collide: In what sense a new ‘regional problem’? Environment and Planning A, 46(10), 2332–2352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison, J., Fedeli, V., & Feiertag, P. (2020). Imagining the evolving spatiality of metropolitan regions. In K. Zimmermann, D. Galland, & J. Harrison (Eds.), Metropolitan regions, planning and governance (pp. 133–152). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Harrison, J., & Hoyler, M. (Eds.). (2015). Megaregions: Globalization’s new urban form?. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  14. Hesse, M., & Leick, A. (2013). Growth, innovation, metropolitan regions: Reconstructing the recent modernisation of spatial development guidelines in Germany. Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 71(3), 343–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. IKM [European Metropolitan Region Initiative]. (2003). Strategiepapier – Initiativkreis Europäische Metropolregionen (Strategy paper—European metropolitan region initiative). Berlin: Technische Universität.Google Scholar
  16. IMeG [Metropolitan Border Regions Initiative Group]. (2013). Initiative group of German regions in cross-border functional regions—Final report. Saarbrücken: IMeG.Google Scholar
  17. Kübler, D., & Lefèvre, C. (2018). Megacity governance and the state. Urban Research & Practice, 11(4), 378–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lang, T., & Török, I. (2017). Metropolitan region policies in the European Union: Following national, European or neoliberal agendas? International Planning Studies, 22(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee, N. (2017). Powerhouse of cards? Understanding the ‘Northern Powerhouse’. Regional Studies, 51(3), 478–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Magnusson, W. (2011). Politics of urbanism: Seeing like a city. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Mayer, M. (2008). To what end do we theorize sociospatial relations? Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 26(3), 414–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. METREX. (2014). Metropolitan dimension—Position statement. Glasgow: METREX.Google Scholar
  23. RECLUS. (1989). Les Villes Europeénnes: Rapport pour la DATAR. Montpellier: RECLUS.Google Scholar
  24. Regional Plan Association. (2006). America 2050: A prospectus. New York: RPA.Google Scholar
  25. Salet, W., Thornley, A., & Kreukels, A. (Eds.). (2003). Metropolitan governance and spatial planning: Comparative case studies of European City-regions. London: Spon Press.Google Scholar
  26. Scott, A. J. (2001). Global city-regions: Trends, theory, policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. UN-Habitat. (2016a). HABITAT III—New urban agenda (Revised Zero Draft). Nairobi: UN-Habitat.Google Scholar
  28. UN-Habitat. (2016b). HABITAT III—New urban agenda. Nairobi: UN-Habitat.Google Scholar
  29. Wachsmuth, D. (2017). Infrastructure alliances: Supply-chain expansion and multi-city growth coalitions. Economic Geography, 93(1), 44–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ward, C., & Swyngedouw, E. (2018). Neoliberation from the ground up: Insurgent capital, regional struggle, and the assetisation of land. Antipode, 50(4), 1077–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zimmermann, K. (2020). From here to there: Mapping the metropolitan politics of policy mobilities. In K. Zimmermann, D. Galland, & J. Harrison (Eds.), Metropolitan regions, planning and governance (pp. 59–74). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia Feiertag
    • 1
    Email author
  • John Harrison
    • 2
  • Valeria Fedeli
    • 3
  1. 1.Dortmund Technical UniversityDortmundGermany
  2. 2.Loughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK
  3. 3.Politecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations