Regional development, power and topological reach: to reach out or fold in?

REFERENCES

• Agamben, G. (1998). Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ahlqvist, T. (2013). Engineering spatial fixes: Relational spatial practices, strategic–topological approach and the construction of a Finnish science–technology district. Geografiska Annaler B: Human Geography, 95(1), 89–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/geob.12011
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2003). Lost geographies of power. Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2009). Three spaces of power: Territory, networks, plus a topological twist in the tale of domination and authority. Journal of Power, 2(2), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/17540290903064267
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2010). Powerful city networks: More than connections, less than domination and control. Urban Studies, 47(3), 2895–2911. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098010377364
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2011). Topological shifts: Power’s changing geographies. Dialogues in Human Geography, 1(3), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820611421546
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2016). Topologies of power: Beyond territory and networks. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Allen, J. (2020). Power’s quiet reach and why it should exercise us. Space and Polity, 24(3), 408–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2020.1759412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, J., & Cochrane, A. (2010). Assemblages of state power: Topological shifts in the organization of government and politics. Antipode, 42(5), 1071–1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00794.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alonso, W. (1973). Urban zero population growth. Daedalus, 102(4), 191–206.
   Google Scholar
• Amin, A. (2002). Spatialities of globalisation. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 34(3), 385–399. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3439
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barca, F. (2009). An agenda for a reformed Cohesion Policy: A place-based approach to meeting European Union challenges and expectations. Independent report prepared at the request of Danuta Hubner, Commissioner for Regional Policy, Commission of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Boverket. (2020). Regional utvecklingsplanering. https://www.boverket.se/sv/PBL-kunskapsbanken/planering/regionplan/utvecklingsplan
   Google Scholar
• Burger, M. J., & Meijers, E. J. (2016). Agglomeration and the rise of urban network externalities. Papers in Regional Science, 95(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12223
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burger, M. J., Meijers, E. J., Hoogerbrugge, M. M., & Tresserra, J. M. (2015). Borrowed size, agglomeration shadows and cultural amenities in North-West Europe. European Planning Studies, 23(6), 1090–1109. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2014.905002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardoso, R., & Meijers, E. (2016). Contrasts between first-tier and second-tier cities in Europe: A functional perspective. European Planning Studies, 24(4), 996–1015. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1120708
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochrane, A. (2018). Relational thinking and the region. In A. Paasi, J. Harrison, & M. Jones (Eds.), Handbook on the geographies of regions and territories (pp. 79–88). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G. (1993). The fold: Leibniz and the baroque. University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doel, M. A. (1999). Poststructuralist geographies: The diabolical art of spatial science. Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, A., Stead, D., & Humer, A. (2015). Conclusions: Services of general interest, territorial cohesion and competitiveness in Europe. In H. Fassmann, D. Rauhut, E. Marques da Costa, & A. Humer (Eds.), Services of general interest: European perspectives and national insights (pp. 259–267). V&R.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 300–316). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Förordning. (2017:583). om regional tillväxtarbete. Näringsdepartementet.
   Google Scholar
• Foss, O., Johansen, S., Johansson, M., & Svensson, B. (2004). Regionalpolitikk ved et vegskille: Går Sverige og Norge i forskjellige retninger? In R. Amdam, & O. Bukve (Eds.), Det regionalpolitiska regimeskiftet – tilfellet Noreg (pp. 107–128). Tapir.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, A. (2017). Tactile topologies of the rural. Rural Studies, 56, 198–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galaso, P. (2018). Network topologies as collective social capital in cities and regions: A critical review of empirical studies. European Planning Studies, 26(3), 571–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1406898
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, M. (2022). Gotländskt näringsliv. Länsstyrelsen i Gotlands län. http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/gotland/Sv/om-lansstyrelsen/om-lanet/Pages/gotland_naringsliv.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Gotlands kommun. (2013). Vision Gotland 2025. Regionalt utvecklingsprogram för Gotland. https://www.gotland.se/75704
   Google Scholar
• Gruber, E., Rauhut, D., & Humer, A. (2019). Territorial cohesion under pressure? Welfare policy and planning responses in Austrian and Swedish peripheries. Papers in Regional Science, 98(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/pirs.12344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, J., Hoyler, M., Derudder, B., Liu, X., & Meijers, E. (2022). Governing polycentric urban regions. Territory, politics, Governance, 11(2), 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2083011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffman, L. M., & Thatcher, J. E. (2019). Urban studies and thinking topologically. Territory, Politics, Governance, 7(2), 141–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2017.1351887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kjaerås, K. (2021). Towards a relational conception of the compact city. Urban Studies, 58(6), 1176–1192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020907281
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lag. (2010:630). On regional utvecklingsansvar. Finansdepartementet.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J., & Mol, A. (2001). Situating technoscience: An inquiry into spatialities. Environment & Planning D: Society & Space, 19(5), 609–621. https://doi.org/10.1068/d243t
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Länsstyrelsen i Södermanland. (2018). Regionalt serviceprogram för Södermanlands län 2014–2020 (Rapport No. 2018:18). Länsstyrelsen i Södermanlands län.
   Google Scholar
• Leyshon, A. (2021). Economic geography I: Uneven development, ‘left behind places’ and ‘levelling up’ in a time of crisis. Progress in Human Geography, 46(6), 1678–1691. https://doi.org/10.1177/03091325211011684
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, L., & Secor, A. J. (2014). Towards a post-mathematical topology. Progress in Human Geography, 38(3), 420–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132513508209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McFarlane, C. (2015). The geographies of urban density: Topology, politics and the city. Progress in Human Geography, 40(5), 629–648. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132515608694
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meijers, E. J., & Burger, M. J. (2017). Stretching the concept of ‘borrowed size’. Urban Studies, 54(1), 269–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098015597642
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murdoch, J. (2006). Post-structuralist geography: A guide to relational space. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Näringsdepartementet. (2001). Regionalpolitiska utredningens slutbetänkande (SOU 2000:87). Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• O’Callaghan, C., Kelly, S., Boyle, M., & Kitchin, R. (2015). Topologies and topographies of Ireland’s neoliberal crisis. Space and Polity, 19(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562576.2014.991120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paasi, A., Harrison, J., & Jones, M. (2018). New consolidated regional geographies. In A. Paasi, J. Harrison, & M. Jones (Eds.), Handbook on the geographies of regions and territories (pp. 1–20). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Pain, K., Shi, S., Black, D., Blower, J., Grimmond, S., Hunt, A., Milcheva, S., Crawford, B., Dale, N., Doolin, S., & Manna, S. (2020). Real estate investment and urban density: Exploring the polycentric urban region using a topological lens. Territory, Politics, Governance, 11(2), 241–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2020.1837665
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partridge, M. D., Rickman, D. S., Ali, K., & Olfert, M. R. (2009). Do new economic geography agglomeration shadows underlie current population dynamics across the urban hierarchy? Papers in Regional Science, 88(2), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5957.2008.00211.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prince, R. (2016). The spaces in between: Mobile policy and the topographies and topologies of the technocracy. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34(3), 420–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775815618401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prince, R. (2017). Local or global policy? Thinking about policy mobility with assemblage and topology. Area, 49(3), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12319
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauhut, D., & Costa, N. (2020). EU:s sammanhållningspolitik och regionala skillnader 2006–2016. Terra: Maantieteellinen Aikakauskirja/Geografisk tidskrift, 132(4), 175–189. https://doi.org/10.30677/terra.89774
   Google Scholar
• Rauhut, D., & Costa, N. (2021a). Territorial cohesion in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden: Measuring the impact 2007 and 2017. Danish Journal of Geography, 121(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167223.2021.1920444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauhut, D., & Costa, N. (2021b). What regions benefit from the post-crisis cohesion policy? Evidence from a territorial cohesion development index. In D. Rauhut, F. Sielker, & A. Humer (Eds.), EU’s cohesion policy and spatial governance: Territorial, economic and social challenges (pp. 185–198). Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Rauhut, D., & Humer, A. (2020). EU and spatial economic growth: Trajectories in economic thought. European Planning Studies, 28(11), 2116–2133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1709416
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauhut, D., & Kahila, P. (2008). The regional welfare burden in the Nordic countries (Nordregio Working Paper No. 2008:6).
   Google Scholar
• Regeringen. (2001). En politik för tillväxt och livskraft i hela landet (Regeringens proposition 2001/02:4).
   Google Scholar
• Regeringen. (2015). En ny regional planering – ökad samordning och bättre bostadsförsörjning (SOU2015:59). Fritzes.
   Google Scholar
• Regeringen. (2021). Nationell strategi för hållbar regional utveckling i hela landet 2021–2030 (Regeringens skrivelse 2020/21:133).
   Google Scholar
• Regeringskansliet. (2007). En nationell strategi för hållbar regional tillväxt och attraktionskraft 2015–2020. Näringsdepartementet.
   Google Scholar
• Regeringskansliet. (2015). En nationell strategi för regional konkurrenskraft, entreprenörskap och sysselsättning 2007–2013. Näringsdepartementet.
   Google Scholar
• Region Gotland. (2020). Remissammanställning Vårt Gotland 2040 – förslag till regional utvecklingsstrategi for Gotland. 2020-08-27, version 1.0. https://gotland.se/109097
   Google Scholar
• Region Gotland. (2021). Vårt Gotland 2040 – regional utvecklingsstrategi för Gotland. https://rus.gotland.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Fullst%C3%A4ndig-version_V%C3%A5rt-Gotland2040.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Regionfakta. (2022). Statistik från län och regioner i Sverige. Regionfakta. https://www.regionfakta.com
   Google Scholar
• Regionförbundet Sörmland. (2011). Sörmlandsstrategin 2020. https://reglab.se/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/strategi-2013-soermlandsstrategin-2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Regionplane- och Trafikkontoret. (2002). Regional utvecklingsplan 2001 för stockholmsregionen. Stockholms läns landsting.
   Google Scholar
• Regionplanenämnden. (2010). Regional utvecklingsplan för Stockholmsregionen RUFS 2010. Stockholms läns landsting och Länsstyrelsen i Stockholms län.
   Google Scholar
• Riksrevisionen. (2022). Den regionala utvecklingspolitiken – svaga förutsättningar för ett effektivt samlat statligt agerande (RIR 2022:8). Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, J. (2015). ‘Arriving at’ urban policies: The topological spaces of urban policy mobility. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(4), 831–834. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sassen, S. (1991). The global city. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sayer, A. (2004). Seeking the geographies of power. Economy and Society, 33(2), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140410001677157
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayer, A. (2013). Looking forward to new realist debates. Dialogues in Human Geography, 3(1), 22–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820613485050
   Google Scholar
• SCB. (2022). Statistics Sweden Statistical Database. www.scb.se
   Google Scholar
• Serres, M., & Latour, B. (1995). Conversations on science, culture and time. University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Servillo, L. (2019). Tailored polities in the shadow of the state’s hierarchy: The CLLD implementation and a future research agenda. European Planning Studies, 27(4), 678–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1569595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, R. G. (2003). World city topologies. Progress in Human Geography, 27(5), 561–582. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132503ph447oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockholms Läns Landsting. (2012). Förslag till regionalt utvecklingsprogram för Sörmland – Sörmlandsstrategin 2020 (Tjänsteutlåtande, Dnr LS 1207-0964).
   Google Scholar
• Tillväxtanalys. (2013). Kommunal översiktsplanering och regionala utvecklingsprogram (Working Paper No. 2013:01). Östersund.
   Google Scholar
• Tillväxtverket. (2015). Strategier för samverkan. Om myndigheters medverkan i det regionala tillväxtarbetet, 2015-2020 (Working Paper No. 0190). Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Tillväxtverket. (2021). Regionalt tillväxtarbete. https://tillvaxtverket.se/amnesomraden/regional-kapacitet/regionalt-tillvaxtarbete.html
   Google Scholar
• Tillväxtverket. (2022). Tillstånd och trender för regional tillväxt 2022. https://tillvaxtverket.se/tillvaxtverket/publikationer/publikationer2023/tillstandochtrenderforregionaltillvaxt2022.3824.html
   Google Scholar
• Van den Berghe, K., Peris, A., Meijers, E., & Jacobs, W. (2022). Friends with benefits: The emergence of the Amsterdam–Rotterdam–Antwerp (ARA) polycentric port region. Territory, Politics, Governance, 11(2), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2021.2014353
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar