Configuring the New ‘Regional World’: On being Caught between Territory and Networks

Abstract

Harrison J. Configuring the new ‘regional world’: on being caught between territory and networks, Regional Studies. Recent years have witnessed a tremendous appeal in debating the relative decline in ‘territorially embedded’ conceptions of regions vis-à-vis the privileging of ‘relational and unbounded’ conceptions. Nevertheless, the most recent skirmishes have seen some scholars emphasize how it is not the privileging of one or other that is important, but recognizing how it is increasingly different combinations of these elements that seem to be emerging in today's new ‘regional world’. Here emphasis is being placed on a need to analyse how the different dimensions of socio-spatial relations (for example, territory, place, network, scale) come together in different ways, at different times, and in different contexts to secure the overall coherence of capitalist, and other, social formations. The purpose of this paper is to make visible the politics of transformation in North West England by uncovering the role and strategies of individual and collective agents, organizations and institutions in orchestrating and steering regional economic development. For it is argued that the unanswered question is not which socio-spatial relations are dominant, emerging or residual in any given space–time, but understanding how and why they are dominant, emerging or residual. The paper suggests the answer to this and other questions is to be found at the interface between emergent spatial strategies and inherited socio-spatial configurations.

区域   领域 相关性的 网络 空间

Harrison J. 配置新的“区域世界”：领土与网络，区域研究。近年来，“领土嵌入式”理念与日益受到垂青的区域 “相关与无界”概念之间存在着激烈的讨论。然而，在近期的小规模碰撞中已出现部分学者不再强调支持某一方或反对另一方的观点，而是开始认识到在目前新“区域世界”中正出现越来越多上述要素的组合。重点在于有必要分析不同的社会－空间关系（例如，地区，地方，网络，尺度）是如何以不同方式、在不同的时间以及语境下进行组合，以保证资本主义以及其他社会形态的连续运转。本文的目的在于显像英格兰西北部转型的政治性通过解释个体以及集体行为者以及组织与机构在策划和督导区域经济发展中的作用。有待解决的问题并非是哪种社会经济空间关系在某特定时空占主导、出现或残留，而是需要了解他们是如何及为何占主导地位、新兴发展或残留。本文表明，这一问题与其他问题的答案通过综合新兴的空间战略与后继社会经济空间结构得以解答。

Région Territoire Relationnel Réseaux Espace

Harrison J. La configuration du nouveau ‘milieu régional’: être coincé entre des territoires et des réseaux, Regional Studies. Au cours des dernières années on a porté un grand intérêt à discuter du déclin relatif des notions de régions ‘ancrées dans les territoires’ par rapport aux notions ‘relationnelles et sans bornes’. Néanmoins, les escarmouches les plus récentes ont vu des spécialistes soulignent qu'il ne l'est ni l'un, ni l'autre qui importe, mais reconnaître que ce sont des combinaisons de plus en plus différentes qui semblent faire le jour dans le nouveau ‘milieu régional’ d'aujourd'hui. Ici on souligne le besoin d'analyser comment les diverses dimensions des rapports socio-géographiques (par exemple, le territoire, l'endroit, le réseau, l'échelle) se réunissent de façons différentes, à des moments différents et dans des contextes différents afin d'assurer la cohérence globale des formations capitalistes, parmi d'autres. Cet article cherche à améliorer la visibilité des politiques en faveur de la transformation dans le nord-ouest de l'Angleterre en dévoilant le rôle et les stratégies des agents, des organisations et des institutions individuels et collectifs quant à la direction et à la gestion de l'aménagement du territoire. On affirme que la question restée sans réponse n'est pas quels rapports socio-géographiques sont dominants, naissants ou résiduels, quels que soient l'espace ou le temps, mais comprendre comment et pourquoi ils sont dominants, naissants ou résiduels. Cet article propose que la réponse à cette question parmi d'autres est à trouver à l'interface entre des stratégies géographiques naissantes et des configurations socio-géographiques héritées.

Region Gebiet Relational Netzwerke Raum

Harrison J. Konfiguration der neuen ‘regionalen Welt’: vom Gefangensein zwischen Gebiet und Netzwerken, Regional Studies. In den letzten Jahren hat sich eine Erörterung des relativen Rückgangs von Konzeptionen der ‘territorialen Eingebettetheit’ von Regionen zugunsten einer Privilegierung von ‘relationalen und ungebundenen’ Konzeptionen enormer Beliebtheit erfreut. Dessen ungeachtet betonten einige Wissenschaftler bei den jüngsten Scharmützeln, dass nicht die Privilegierung der einen oder anderen Konzeption wichtig sei, sondern vielmehr eine Anerkennung der Tatsache, dass in der heutigen neuen ‘regionalen Welt’ zunehmend unterschiedliche Kombinationen dieser Elemente zu entstehen scheinen. Hierbei wird die Notwendigkeit betont zu analysieren, wie sich die verschiedenen Dimensionen der sozioräumlichen Beziehungen (z. B. Gebiet, Ort, Netzwerk, Maßstab) auf unterschiedliche Weise, zu unterschiedlichen Zeiten und in unterschiedlichen Kontexten miteinander verbinden, um die Gesamtkohärenz der kapitalistischen und sonstigen Gesellschaftsformationen zu sichern. In diesem Beitrag soll die Politik der Transformation in Nordwestengland sichtbar gemacht werden, indem die Rolle und Strategien der einzelnen und kollektiven Akteure, Organisationen und Institutionen bei der Orchestrierung und Steuerung der regionalen Wirtschaftsentwicklung verdeutlicht werden. Ich argumentiere nämlich, dass die unbeantwortete Frage nicht lautet, welche sozioräumlichen Beziehungen in einer bestimmten Raum-Zeit-Kombination dominant, im Entstehen begriffen oder noch verbleibend sind, sondern dass es darauf ankommt zu verstehen, wie und warum sie dominant, im Entstehen begriffen oder noch verbleibend sind. Im Beitrag wird die These aufgestellt, dass die Antwort auf diese und weitere Fragen an der Schnittstelle zwischen den entstehenden räumlichen Strategien und den übernommenen sozioräumlichen Konfigurationen zu suchen ist.

Región Territorio Relacional Redes Espacio

Harrison J. Configuración del nuevo ‘mundo regional’: atrapados entre el territorio y las redes, Regional Studies. En los últimos años hemos sido testigos de un enorme interés por debatir el declive relativo de las concepciones de ‘integración territorial’ de las regiones, y también el privilegio de las concepciones ‘relacionales e ilimitadas’. Sin embargo, las escaramuzas más recientes se deben a que algunos académicos han puesto de relieve que lo importante no son los privilegios de las concepciones, sino que hay que reconocer que en el nuevo ‘mundo regional’ de hoy día existen combinaciones cada vez más distintas de estos elementos. Aquí hacemos hincapié en la necesidad de analizar cómo las diferentes dimensiones de las relaciones socioespaciales (por ejemplo, territorio, lugar, red, escala) se combinan de distinto modo, en diferentes momentos, y en distintos contextos para asegurar la coherencia global de formaciones sociales capitalistas y otras. La finalidad de este artículo es hacer visible las políticas de la transformación en el noroeste de Inglaterra al revelar el papel y las estrategias de los agentes individuales y colectivos, las organizaciones y las instituciones en la orquestación y orientación del desarrollo económico regional. Y es que sostenemos que la cuestión sin responder no es cuáles son las relaciones socioespaciales dominantes, emergentes o residuales en cualquier espacio-tiempo determinado sino comprender cómo y porqué son dominantes, emergentes o residuales. En este artículo sugerimos que la respuesta a esta y otras cuestiones se halla en la interfaz entre las estrategias espaciales emergentes y las configuraciones socioespaciales heredadas.

Keywords:

• Region
• Territory
• Relational
• Networks
• Space

JEL classifications:

• O18
• R10
• R58

Acknowledgements

Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the Regional Studies Association International Conference in Newcastle, UK, April 2011; and at the University of Manchester joint Planning and Landscape/Geography Research Seminar, October 2011. The author wishes to thank the organizers and audiences at these events; the Editors of the journal; and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback. The usual disclaimers apply.

Notes

Two of the original authors have since gone on to make a first attempt at this (Jones and Jessop, 2010).

This is not an entirely new call; rather it has roots in earlier accounts on the polymorphic character of sociospatiality seen in the work of Lefebvre (1991, pp. 85–88), amongst others.

Often neglected in the accounts of radical relationalist scholars, this was done in a way ‘befitting the current era of social complexity and ever more porous territorial boundaries’ (MacLeod and Jones, 2001, p. 671).

Readers will be reminded of the influential and thought-provoking paper by Ann Markusen on methodological and conceptual practice in regional analysis which made similar claims more than a decade ago (Markusen, 1999).

The focus of this paper is on sub-national regions and for this reason the author limits this discussion to debates that have taken place within human geography. It is worth noting that albeit this debate has been informed and influenced by debates in political science, the focus of the former has been sub-national regions, whereas the latter often concerns itself distinguishing between sub-national and supranational forms of regionalism and regionalization. As this is a theme picked up by other papers in this issue (for example, by García-Álvarez and Trillo-Santamaría, 2012), the author focuses on the debates as they developed in human geography whilst recognizing the links to these broader debates.

Lovering's (1999) shrill warning of the dangers of the ‘policy tail wagging the analytical dog’ should be remembered here. This suggests that the enthusiasm of policy-makers to adopt network approaches to regional governance leads to the construction of more networked forms of governance, which is then used as further evidence of networked spaces acting as autonomous political and economic spaces, thus elevating network approaches to a position of orthodoxy and fuelling further rounds of policy intervention.

The following two sections are based on empirical research undertaken by the author and funded by two research grants – ‘Regions in Focus – A “New Regionalist” Interpretation of England's Northwest’ (ESRC 2002–06) and ‘Cities and Regions in Focus – Exploring the Evolution of City Development Companies in the English Regions’ (British Academy 2008–09). This involved documentary research and interviews with key actors involved in regional economic development and regional policy in England in general, and the North West in particular. A selection of quotes is used to elucidate the discussion by offering insight into the role of political agency and territorial interests in the region over the period.

Recent figures seem to bear this out with the North West seeing the greatest rise in competitiveness of any English region since 1997 (Centre for International Competitiveness, 2010).

Available to view at http://www.thenorthernway.co.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id=418 (accessed on 15 September 2010).

Note that the key service centres identified in 2006 have now disappeared.

Integrated Regional Strategies were announced by the UK government in 2008 and require regions to combine the Regional Economic Strategy and Regional Spatial Strategy.

It would be wrong to say networks have disappeared completely – but where regional connectivity had been about virtual flows of knowledge, money and ideas in the years previous, in 2010 it now relates to absolute movements of people and goods via the regions' motorway and rail networks.

The author is indebted to the reviewers for raising this point, and for providing some of the questions.