Metropolitan region policies in the European Union: following national, European or neoliberal agendas?

References

• Adam, B. 2003. “Spatial Policies for Metropolitan Regions – Identity, Participation and Integration.” European Planning Studies 11 (6): 739–747. doi: 10.1080/0965431032000108413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ARL (Academy for Spatial Research and Planning). 2007. Metropolitan Regions-Innovation, Competition, Capacity for Action. Position Paper from the ARL No. 71. Hannover.
   Google Scholar
• Avdikos, V., and A. Chardas. 2015. “European Union Cohesion Policy Post 2014: More (Place-based and Conditional) Growth – Less Redistribution and Cohesion.” Territory, Politics, Governance. doi:10.1080/21622671.2014.992460.
   Google Scholar
• Beaverstock, J. V., R. G. Smith, and P. J. Taylor. 1999. “A Roster of World Cities.” Cities 16 (6): 445–458. doi: 10.1016/S0264-2751(99)00042-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benedek, J. 2013. “Metropolisztérségek és metropolizáció a posztszocialista Romániában.” Erdélyi Múzeum 3: 99–107.
   Google Scholar
• Benedek, J., and M. Cristea. 2014. “Growth Pole Development and ‘Metropolization’ in Post-Socialist Romania.” Studia UBB Geographia LIX (2): 125–138.
   Google Scholar
• Benson, D., and A. Jordan. 2011. “What Have We Learned from Policy Transfer Research? Dolowitz and Marsh Revisited.” Political Studies Review 9 (3): 366–378. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00240.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berg, L., E. Braun, and J. Meer. 2007. National Policy Responses to Urban Challenges in Europe. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Blotevogel, H. H. 1998. “ Europäische Metropolregion Rhein-Ruhr - Theoretische, empirische und politische Perspektiven eines neuen raumordnungspolitischen Konzepts.” Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung (ILS) des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen Nr. 135, 1. Auflage. ILS, Dortmund.
   Google Scholar
• Blotevogel, H. H. 2001. “Die Metropolregionen in der Raumordnungspolitik Deutschlands : ein neues strategisches Raumbild?” Geographica Helvetica 56 (3): 157–168. doi: 10.5194/gh-56-157-2001
   Google Scholar
• BMVBS (Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Bau und Stadtentwicklung). 2006. “ Leitbilder und Handlungsstrategien für die Raumentwicklung in Deutschland.” Verabschiedet von der Ministerkonferenz für Raumordnung am, Berlin.
   Google Scholar
• Böhme, K., and B. Waterhout. 2008. “The Europeanization of Planning.” In European Spatial Research and Planning, edited by A. Faludi, 225–248. Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Brunet, R. 1989. Les villes europeénnes: Rapport pour la DATAR (in French). Montpellier: RECLUS.
   Google Scholar
• Cheshire, P. C., and Commission of the European Communities. 1988. Urban Problems and Regional Policy in the European Community / prepared by Paul Cheshire … [et al.]. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, J., and A. Jones. 2008. “The Spatialities of Europeanisation: Territory, Government and Power in ‘Europe.’” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 33 (3): 300–318. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-5661.2008.00309.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czyż, T., and J. Hauke. 2011. “Evolution of Regional Disparities in Poland.” Quaestiones Geographicae 30 (2): 35–48. doi: 10.2478/v10117-011-0016-y
   Google Scholar
• Derudder, B. 2006. “On Conceptual Confusion in Empirical Analyses of a Transnational Urban Network.” Urban Studies 43 (11): 2027–2046. doi: 10.1080/00420980600897842
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domański, B. 2010. “Should We Fight Local and Regional Disparities in Economic Development in Poland?.” In Regional Development and Regional Policy in Poland: First Experiences and New Challenges of the European Union Membership, Polish Academy of Sciences, Committee for Spatial Economy and Regional Planning, edited by P. Churski, and W. Ratajczak, 132–141. Warsaw: Polish Academy of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Dranca, D. 2013. “Cluj-Napoca Metropolitan Zone: Between a Growth Pole and a Deprived Area.” Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences (40 E/2013): 49–70.
   Google Scholar
• Dühr, S., C. Colomb, and V. Nadin. 2010. European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Egedy, T., Z. Kovács, and A. C. Kondor. 2016. “Metropolitan Region Building and Territorial Development in Budapest: The Role of National Policies.” International Planning Studies, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/13563475.2016.1219652.
   Google Scholar
• Egermann, M. 2009. “Metropolregionen in den nationalen raumplanungspolitischen Diskursen in Deutschland, Polen und der Tschechischen Republik.” In Europäische Raumentwicklung - Metropolregionen und periphere Regionen, edited by E. Güldenberg, T. Preising, and F. Scholles, 71–91. Frankfurt/ Main: Lang. (Stadt und Region als Handlungsfeld; 8).
   Google Scholar
• Ehrlich, K., A. Kriszan, and T. Lang. 2012. “Urban Development in Central and Eastern Europe – Between Peripheralization and Centralization?” disP – The Planning Review 48 (2): 77–92. doi: 10.1080/02513625.2012.721611
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ESPON. 2006. “ Potentials for Polycentric Development in Europe.” Project Report. Luxembourg. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/ESPON2006Projects/ThematicProjects/Polycentricity/fr-1.1.1_revised-full.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 1997. Towards an Urban Agenda in the European Union. Brussels: European Commission. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/communic/pdf/urban/urban_197_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 1998. “ Sustainable Urban Development: A Framework for Action.” Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/pdf/framework_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 1999a. “ ESDP – European Spatial Development Perspective. Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union.” Luxembourg. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/pdf/sum_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 1999b. “ Phase I Urban Pilot Projects.” Accessed 19 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/urban2/urban/upp/src/frame4.htm.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2007. “ Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities.” Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/themes/urban/leipzig_charter.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2011. The Urban and Regional Dimension of Europe 2020. Seventh Progress Report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion. Luxembourg.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013a. “ Refocusing EU Cohesion Policy for Maximum Impact on Growth and Jobs: The Reform in 10 points.” Inforegio-Newsroom, 15 October. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/newsroom/detail.cfm?id=1057&lang=en.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013b. “ The Urban and Regional Dimension of the Crisis.” Eighth Progress Report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion. Luxembourg. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/interim8/interim8_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. 2000. Presidency Conclusions. European Council 100/1/00, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• European Economic and Social Committee. 2004. “ Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘European Metropolitan Areas: Socio-Economic Implications for Europe’s future.’” Accessed 18 November 2013. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2004:302:0101:0108:EN:PDF.
   Google Scholar
• European Economic and Social Committee. 2011. Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Metropolitan Areas and City Regions in Europe 2020, ECO/ 299. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• European Institute of Urban Affairs. 1992. Urbanisation and the Functions of Cities in the European Community. Regional Development Studies No. 4, CEC Directorate-General for Regional Policies. Prepared by the European Institute of Urban Affairs, Liverpool John Moores University.
   Google Scholar
• Friedmann, J. 1986. “The World City Hypothesis.” Development and Change 17 (1): 69–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.1986.tb00231.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedmann, J. 2002. The Prospect of Cities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giannakourou, G. 2012. “The Europeanization of National Planning: Explaining the Causes and the Potentials of Change.” Planning Practice and Research 17 (1): 117–135. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2012.661195.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, I., and N. Buck. 2005. “Cities in the New Conventional Wisdom.” In Changing Cities – Rethinking Urban Competitiveness, Cohesion and Governance, edited by N. Buck, I. Gordon, and A. Harding, 1–21. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Göddecke-Stellmann, J., R. Kawka, H. Lutter, T. Pütz, V. Schmidt-Seiwert, K. P. Schön, and M. Spangenberg. eds. 2011. “ Metropolitan Areas in Europe.” BBSR-Online-Publikation, Nr. 01/2011, Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://www.espon-usespon.eu/dane/web_usespon_library_files/1200/de_metroareaeu_2011.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Herrschel, Tassilo. 2012. “Network Regionalism, Development Agencies and Peripheralisation through ‘Loss of Voice’.” In Regional Development Agencies: The Next Generation? Networking, Knowledge and Regional Policies. Regions and Cities, 172–186. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• HM Government. 1972. Local Government Act. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Jean, Y., and M. Vanier. 2009. La France. Aménager les territoires (2nd ed). Paris: Armand Colin.
   Google Scholar
• Jouve, B. 2000. “Metropolitan Government and New Forms of Legitimacy in France: The Example of Lyons.” Regional and Federal Studies 10 (3): 45–60. doi: 10.1080/13597560008421131
   Google Scholar
• Jurczek, P. 2008. “ European Metropolitan Regions in Germany: A New Spatial Planning Strategy in Europe.” Kommunal- und regionalwissenschaftliche Arbeiten online (KrAo), 16. Accessed 18 November 2013. https://www.tu-chemnitz.de/phil/europastudien/geographie/download/krao16.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Knieling, J. 2012. “Metropolregionen – Strategische Handlungsfelder für eine zukunftsfähige Stadt- und Regionalentwicklung.” In Die diskutierte Region. Probleme und Handlungsfelder der Metropolregion Rhein-Main, edited by J. Monstadt, K. Zimmermann, T. Robischon, and B. Schönig, 13–40. Frankfurt: Campus.
   Google Scholar
• Krätke, S. 2007. “Metropolisation of the European Economic Territory as a Consequence of Increasing Specialisation of Urban Agglomerations in the Knowledge Economy.” European Planning Studies 15 (1): 1–27. doi: 10.1080/09654310601016424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kübler, D. 2012. “Introduction: Metropolitanisation and Metropolitan Governance.” European Political Science 11 (3): 402–408. doi: 10.1057/eps.2011.41
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, T. 2011. “Regional Development Issues in Central and Eastern Europe: Shifting Research Agendas from a Focus on Peripheries to Peripheralisation?.” In Geography in Visegrad and Neighbour Countries, edited by A. Eröss, and D. Karacsonyi, 57–64. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Science Geographical Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Lang, T. 2012. “Shrinkage, Metropolization and Peripheralization in East Germany.” European Planning Studies 20 (10): 1747–1754. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2012.713336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leber, N., and K. R. Kunzmann. 2006. “Entwicklungsperspektiven ländlicher Räume in Zeiten des Metropolenfiebers.” disP - The Planning Review 42: 58–70. doi: 10.1080/02513625.2006.10556963
   Google Scholar
• Lux, G. 2015. “Minor Cities in a Metropolitan World: Challenges for Development and Governance in Three Hungarian Urban Agglomerations.” International Planning Studies 20 (1–2): 21–38. doi: 10.1080/13563475.2014.942491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maier, K. 2012. “Europeanization and Changing Planning in East-Central Europe: An Easterner's View.” Planning Practice and Research 27 (1): 137–154. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2012.661596
   Google Scholar
• Megerle, H. E. 2009. “ Metropolitan Regions as a New Spatial Planning Concept. Aspects of Implementation, Using the Example of South-Western Germany.” Metropolitan Regions and Spatial Development, Part 4. Hannover: Academy for Spatial Research and Planning.
   Google Scholar
• METREX. 2000. “ The Metrex Report. Position Statement for the first five years of Metrex.” Accessed 18 November 2013. http://www.eurometrex.org/Docs/About/enreport2000.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Mikula, L., and T. Kaczmarek. 2016. “Metropolitan Integration in Poland: The Case of Poznan Metropolis.” International Planning Studies, 1–14. doi: 10.1080/13563475.2016.1256191.
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Regional Development. 2011. Regional Policy in Poland. Warsaw.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, K. 2014. “The Rise of Metropolitics: Urban Governance in the Age of the City-Region.” In Governing Urban Economies: Innovation and Inclusion in Canadian City-Regions, edited by N. Bradford and A. Bramwell, 297–318. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nagy, G. 2013. “International Workshop on Metropolitan Regions.” Hungarian Geographical Bulletin 62 (2): 226–230.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, P., and A. Thornley. 2012. “Planning for World Cities: Shifting Agendas and Differing Politics.” In International Handbook of Globalization and World Cities, edited by B. Derudder, M. Hoyler, and P. J. Taylor, 328–335. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Parkinson, M. 2005. “Urban Policy in Europe: Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going?.” In Cities in Europe – Europe in the Cities, Europaforum Wien, edited by E. Antalovsky, J. Dangshat, and M. Parkinson, 17–69. Liverpool: European Institute of Urban Affairs.
   Google Scholar
• Raagmaa, G., T. Kalvet, and R. Kasesalu. 2014. “Europeanization and De-Europeanization of Estonian Regional Policy.” European Planning Studies 22 (4): 775–795. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.772754
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redcliffe-Maud, J. June 1969. Royal Commission on Local Government in England 1966–1969, Vol. I. Report (Cmnd. 4040). HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Reimer, M., P. Getsimis, and H. Blotevogel. 2014. “Spatial Planning Systems and Practice in Europe. A Comparative Perspective.” In Spatial Planning Systems and Practices in Europe: A Comparative Perspective on Continuity and Changes, edited by M. Reimer, P. Getsimis, and H. Blotevogel, 1–20. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ritter, E. H. 1997. “ Europäische Metropolregion Rhein-Ruhr oder: Kann aus einer Städte- Agglomeration eine Metropolregion werden?” In: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung – ARL (ed.): Räumliche Disparitäten und Bevölkerungswanderungen in Europa, Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte 202, 156–170, Hannover.
   Google Scholar
• Sassen, S. 1991. The Global City. New York: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Servillo, L. 2010. “Territorial Cohesion Discourses: Hegemonic Strategic Concepts in European Spatial Planning.” Planning Theory & Practice 11 (3): 397–416. doi: 10.1080/14649357.2010.500135
   Google Scholar
• Schweizerischer Bundesrat, KdK, BPUK, SSV, and SGV. eds. 2012. Raumkonzept Schweiz 2011. Bern: Überarbeitete Fassung.
   Google Scholar
• Smetkowski, M., G. Gorzelak, M. Kozak, A. Olechnicka, A. Ploszaj, and K. Wojnar. 2011. The European Metropolises and Their Regions: From Economic Landscapes to Metropolitan Networks. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe SCHOLAR.
   Google Scholar
• Sýkora, L., and S. Bouzarovski. 2012. “Multiple Transformations: Conceptualising the Post-Communist Urban Transition.” Urban Studies 49 (1): 43–60. doi: 10.1177/0042098010397402
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szlachta, J., and J. Zaucha. 2010. A New Paradigm of the EU Regional Development in the Context of the Poland’s National Spatial Development Concept. Working Papers no. 001/2010. Sopot: Institute for Development.
   Google Scholar
• Territorial Agenda 2020. 2011. “ Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020: Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions.” Agreed at the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development on 19th May 2011, Gödöllő, Hungary. Accessed 18 November 2013. http://www.eu2011.hu/files/bveu/documents/TA2020.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• UN-Habitat. 2013. “ The State of European Cities in Transition 2013. Taking Stock After 20 Years of Reform.” Executive Summary. Accessed 7 May 2015 http://unhabitat.org/books/the-state-of-european-cities-in-transition-2013/.
   Google Scholar
• Waterhout, B., F. Othengrafen, and O. Sykes. 2013. “Neo-liberalization Processes and Spatial Planning in France, Germany, and the Netherlands: An Exploration.” Planning Practice and Research 28 (1): 141–159. doi: 10.1080/02697459.2012.699261
   Google Scholar
• Wiechmann, T. 2009. “Raumpolitische Diskurse um Metropolregionen in Europa – Eine Spurensuche.” In Metropolregionen. Innovationen, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfähigkeit. Metropolregionen und Raumentwicklung Teil 3, edited by J. Knieling, 101–132. Hannover: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, D., and C. Game. 2002. Local Government in the United Kingdom (3rd ed). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar