Abstract
This chapter outlines the idea of polycentric development , one of the core principles of territorial cohesion discourse. As a normative and ideological vision of balanced spatial development, polycentric urban systems are seen as effective spatial arrangements overcoming regional disparities. Commonly shared policy imaginaries of polycentricity, however, have yet to fully reflect the complex nature of urban system dynamics. The chapter offers deeper insight into the three crucial facets of polycentricity: scale-dependency , normativity versus factual practices, and co-operative relationships, which together contribute to the ambiguous and multi-interpretative character of polycentric development . As a scale-dependent concept, polycentricity has various forms and implications for urban systems at different geographical scales . Consequently, universal applicability of this normative concept is hampered by colourful urban spaces and overwhelming territorial diversity. Even if fundamental spatial principles of polycentricity are fulfilled, existing territorial settings and urban relations may diverge from cohesive spatial patterns and lead to increased urban competition. Finally, co-operative relationships among urban centres within polycentric spatial structures are not fully developed because of excessive institutional fragmentation and a missing framework for tackling collectively shared problems. These issues are discussed within a broader theoretical debate on urban systems and territorial cohesion while referring to the essential studies which serve as evidence of the intricate all-encompassing analytical grasp of polycentricity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Supporting balanced polycentric urban systems and a new relationship between cities and rural areas became the key principles of the ESDP at a meeting of ministers responsible for spatial planning in Leipzig in 1994 (ESPON SPON 2005).
- 2.
Polycentricity could also, by operationalizing at the global level, point to the development of alternative global centres in terms of power and importance within the global economic network (London and partly Paris may be considered so-called ‘global cities ’ within the European territory).
References
Ache P, Andersen HT, Maloutas T, Raco M, Tasan-Kok T (eds) (2008) Cities between competitiveness and cohesion: discourses, realities and implementation. Springer, Berlin
Albrechts L (2001) How to proceed from image and discourse to action: as applied to the Flemish Diamond. Urban Stud 38(4):733–745
Alonso W (1973) Urban zero population growth. Daedalus 102:191–206
Anas A, Arnott R, Small KA (1998) Urban spatial structure. J Econ Lit 36(3):1426–1464
Bailey N, Turok I (2001) Central Scotland as a polycentric urban region: useful planning concept or Chimera? Urban Stud 38(4):697–715
Berry BJL (1964) Cities as systems within systems of cities. Pap Reg Sci Assoc 13(1):146–163
Böhme K, Gløersen E (2011) Territorial cohesion storylines: understanding a policy concept. Spatial Foresight Briefing 2011:1. Luxembourg
Burger M, Meijers E (2012) Form follows function? Linking morphological and functional polycentricity. Urban Stud 49(5):1127–1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098011407095
Burger MJ, Meijers EJ, Hoogerbrugge MM, Tresserra JM (2015) Borrowed size, agglomeration shadows and cultural amenities in North-West Europe. Eur Plan Stud 23(6):1090–1109. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.905002
Camagni R (1993) From city hierarchy to city network: reflections about an emerging paradigm. In: Lakshmanan TR, Nijkamp P (eds) Structure and change in the space economy. Springer, Berlin, pp 66–87
Christaller W (1933) Die Zentralen Orte in Süddeutschland. Gustav Fischer, Jena
CSO (2011) Census 2011. Available from: https://www.czso.cz/csu/sldb
Davoudi S (2003) Polycentricity in European spatial planning: from an analytical tool to a normative agenda. Eur Plan Stud 11(8):979–999. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965431032000146169
Davoudi S (2005) Understanding territorial cohesion. Plann Pract Res 20(4):433–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697450600767926
de Goei B, Burger MJ, van Oort FG, Kitson M (2010) Functional polycentrism and urban network development in the Greater South East, United Kingdom: evidence from commuting patterns, 1981–2001. Reg Stud 44(9):1149–1170. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400903365102
EC (1997) Treaty of Amsterdam. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
EC (1999) ESDP—European spatial development perspective: towards balanced and sustainable development of the territory of the European Union. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
ESPON (2005) ESPON Project 1.1.1: potentials for polycentric development in Europe: project report. ESPON, Luxembourg
ESPON (2014) Making Europe open and polycentric: visions and scenarios for the European territory towards 2050. ESPON, Luxembourg
Evers D, Tennekes J, Borsboom J, Helingenberg H, Thissen M (2009) A territorial impact assessment of territorial cohesion for the Netherlands. Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL), Hague
Faludi A (2004) Territorial cohesion: old (French) wine in new bottles? Urban Stud 41(7):1349–1365. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000214833
Finka M, Kluvánková T (2015) Managing complexity of urban systems: a polycentric approach. Land Use Policy 42:602–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.09.016
Franz P, Hornych C (2010) Political institutionalisation and economic specialisation in polycentric metropolitan regions: the case of the East German ‘saxony triangle’. Urban Stud 47(12):2665–2682. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009359951
Hall P (2002) Urban and regional planning. Routledge, London
Hall P, Pain K (eds) (2006) The polycentric metropolis: learning from mega-city regions in Europe. Earthscan, London
Häzners J, Jirgena H (2013) Polycentricity measures and regional disparities. In: Annual 19th international scientific conference proceedings: research for rural development 2013, May 15–17, Latvia University of Agriculture, Jelgava
Jensen OB, Richardson T (2001) Nested vision: new rationalities of space in European spatial planning. Reg Stud 35(8):703–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400120084696
Kloosterman RC, Lambregts B (2001) Clustering of economic activities in polycentric urban regions: the case of the Randstad. Urban Studies 38(4):717–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120035303
Kloosterman RC, Musterd S (2001) The polycentric urban region: towards a research agenda. Urban Stud 38(4):623–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980120035259
Kunzmann KR, Wegener M (1991) The pattern of urbanisation in Western Europe 1960–90. Institut für Raumplanung, Universität Dortmund, Dortmund
Lambregts B (2009) The polycentric metropolis unpacked: concepts, trends, and policy in the Randstad Holland. Doctoral dissertation, Amsterdam Institute for Metropolitan and International Development Studies, Amsterdam
Malý J (2016a) Impact of polycentric urban systems on intra-regional disparities: a micro-regional approach. Eur Plan Stud 24(1):116–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1054792
Malý J (2016b) Small towns in the context of “borrowed size” and “agglomeration shadow” debates: the case of the South Moravian region (Czech Republic). Eur Countrys 8(4):333–350. https://doi.org/10.1515/euco-2016-0024
Malý J (2018) Questioning territorial cohesion: (un)equal access to services of general interest. Pap Reg Sci 97(2):323–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12250
Malý J, Mulíček O (2016) European territorial cohesion policies: parallels to socialist central planning? Moravian Geogr Rep 24(1):14–26. https://doi.org/10.1515/mgr-2016-0002
Marston SA, Smith N (2001) States, scales and households: limits to scale thinking? A response to Brenner. Prog Hum Geogr 25(4):615–619. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913201682688968
McGinnis MD (ed) (1999) Polycentric governance and development: readings from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor
McMillen DP (2001) Nonparametric employment subcenter identification. J Urban Econ 50(3):448–473. https://doi.org/10.1006/juec.2001.2228
Medeiros E (2016) Territorial cohesion: an EU concept. Eur J Spatial Dev 60. Available from: http://www.nordregio.org/publications/territorial-cohesion-an-eu-concept/
Meijers E (2008) Summing small cities does not make a large city: polycentric urban regions and the provision of cultural, leisure and sports amenities. Urban Stud 45(11):2323–2342. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098008095870
Meijers EJ, Burger MJ (2017) Stretching the concept of ‘borrowed size’. Urban Stud 54(1):269–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015597642
Meijers E, Romein A (2003) Realizing potential: building regional organizing capacity in polycentric urban regions. Eur Urban Reg Stud 10(2):173–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776403010002005
Meijers E, Sandberg K (2006) Polycentric development to combat regional disparities? The relation between polycentricity and regional disparities in European countries. In: Proceedings of the 46th congress of the European Regional Science Association, August 30–September 3, Volos, ERSA
Meijers EJ, Burger MJ, Hoogerbrugge MM (2016) Borrowing size in networks of cities: city size, network connectivity and metropolitan functions in Europe. Pap Reg Sci 95(1):181–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12181
Mulíček O, Malý J (2018) Moving towards more cohesive and polycentric spatial patterns? Evidence from the Czech Republic. Pap Reg Sci. Early view online, https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12383
Olsson AR, Cars G (2011) Polycentric spatial development: institutional challenges to intermunicipal cooperation. Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft 31(2):155–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10037-011-0054-x
Ostrom E (1999) Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annu Rev Polit Sci 2:493–535. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.493
Ostrom V, Tiebout C, Warren R (1961) The organization of government in metropolitan areas. Am Polit Sci Rev 55:831–842
Parr JB (2004) The polycentric urban region: a closer inspection. Reg Stud 38(3):231–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/003434042000211114
Partridge MD, Rickman DS, Ali K, Olfert MR (2009) Do new economic geography agglomeration shadows underlie current population dynamics across the urban hierarchy? Pap Reg Sci 88(2):445–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2008.00211.x
Pereira RHM, Nadalin V, Monasterio L, Albuquerque PHM (2013) Urban centrality: a simple index. Geogr Anal 45(1):77–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/gean.12002
Robert J (2007) The origins of territorial cohesion and the vagaries of its trajectory. In: Faludi A (ed) Territorial cohesion and the European model of society. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, pp 23–35
Sýkora L, Mulíček O, Maier K (2009) City regions and polycentric territorial development: concepts and practice. Urban Res Pract 2(3):233–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535060903319095
Taylor PJ, Evans DM, Pain K (2008) Application of the interlocking network model to mega-city regions: measuring polycentricity within and beyond city-regions. Reg Stud 42(8):1079–1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400701874214
Territorial Agenda (2007) Territorial agenda of the European Union. Agreed on 24/25 May 2007, Commission of the European Communities, Leipzig
Territorial Agenda (2011) Territorial agenda of the European Union 2020. Agreed on 19 May 2011, Commission of the European Communities, Gödöllő
Tsai Y-H (2005) Quantifying urban form: compactness versus ‘Sprawl’. Urban Stud 42(1):141–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/0042098042000309748
Vanolo A (2010) European spatial planning between competitiveness and territorial cohesion: shadows of neo-liberalism. Eur Plan Stud 18(8):1301–1315. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654311003791358
Vasanen A (2013) Spatial integration and functional balance in polycentric urban systems: a multi-scalar approach. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 104(4):410–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/tesg.12029
Veneri P, Burgalassi D (2012) Questioning polycentric development and its effects: issues of definition and measurement for the Italian NUTS 2 Regions. Eur Plan Stud 20(6):1017–1037. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.673566
Waterhout B (2007) Territorial cohesion: the underlying discourses. In: Faludi A (ed) Territorial cohesion and the European model of society. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, pp 37–59
Waterhout B (2008) The institutionalisation of European spatial planning. IOS Press, Amsterdam
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Malý, J. (2019). Polycentric Urban Systems and Territorial Cohesion. In: Medeiros, E. (eds) Territorial Cohesion. The Urban Book Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03386-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03386-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03385-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03386-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)