Abstract
The network concept has become quite well‐established and is used in a wide variety of disciplines. The application of the concept in the context of spatial planning seems rather vague though. This article focuses on the gap between the normative network concept, as used in the Flemish Diamond, and everyday factual reality. A discourse analysis of the performance of the concept at lower planning levels shows a wide variety of reading and use of the original concept. It is argued that only the careful selection of a strategic project for the Flemish Diamond, which could attract the interest and sympathy of a very diverse range of actors, might be able to bridge the gap. To increase the performance of the concept, principles for network management as a multi‐level activity are formulated.
Notes
Louis Albrechts, Institute of Urban and Regional Planning, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. E‐mail: [email protected]
Griet Lievois, Flemish Administration for Spatial Planning, Brussels, Belgium. E‐mail: [email protected]
For more information on how and why the Flemish Diamond was conceived as a potential network and the naming and framing of this network, see Albrechts (Citation1998).
Walloon Triangle: the cities of Brussels, Namur and Charleroi form the anchors of this triangular urban constellation.
Benelux‐Delta: the central area in the Benelux region, characterized by two main ports, a dense concentration of urban areas, urban networks and economic activities, regional complexes of intensive agriculture, a very dense infrastructure network and a large number of international functions.
Antwerp Fragments: the north‐west corner of the Flemish Diamond is characterized by urban fragmentation. The provincial Structure Plan for Antwerp introduces policies to enhance spatial coherence, spatial concentration and new transport systems in this area.