a european territorial research community university of luxembourg 13-14 october 2005 linking...
TRANSCRIPT
A European Territorial Research Community
University of Luxembourg 13-14 October 2005
Linking Territorial Research and Practice: An agenda for the future
Cliff Hague
Towards a European Research and Practice AgendaBefore...
Towards a European Research
and Practice
Agenda!!!
Feeding research results into policy processes
• Goal: “absorption” of research results (out of 5)– by Direct. General for Spatial Policy +++– by other departments ++– by other government levels +
• Means: raise issues– Are the data reliable, in line with our own
data?– Do the concepts match or contradict? – Are the policy recommandations in line with
national policies?– Do they enhance or weaken our position?
Knowledge and Power in Territorial Research
• Space – geographical positioning• Territory – governance of space
• Scales – from nation states to ‘glocalisation’
• Networks – who is connected and who is excluded?
• Institutions – organisations, rules, ethos
The shaping of ESPON
• The Commission, its Directorates and the Member States – the European project of building consensus amongst policy elites
• This model was rejected in 2005 referenda
• From land use planning to spatial planning and now territorial cohesion (from ESPON to ETCON?)
Contested concepts are sanitised
• Conflicts are subsumed into ambiguous concepts as a basis for agreement
• Lawyers and bureaucrats codify those concepts and define the rationality and legitimacy of practices
• Research provides the information base to operate the concepts
Territorial research practice in ESPON
• Prime emphasis on the European Scale – 29 countries
• Limited attention to neighbouring countries and to ‘Europe in the World’
• Limited focus on intra-regional or urban scale; exclusion of intra-urban analysis
• Wider territorial research community needs to fill the gaps
Territorial research practice in ESPON
• Development and mapping of indicators and typologies
• Data limitations• ‘Snapshot’ rather than process• Concepts demonstrated and
made operational• Role for the wider territorial
research community is scrutiny and critical assessment
Some areas for debate
• Deconstruct ‘territorial cohesion’ – who defines its meaning and how?
• Can competitiveness and cohesion be reconciled in territorial practice?
• From standardised infrastructure provision by governments to markets and choice – what are the territorial impacts and opportunities?
Social Cohesion and Diversity: Good Practice
• Delivering equality of opportunity requires an understanding and valuing of diversity
• Equality and diversity need to be ‘mainstream’ concerns in an organisation and its codes of practice
• Organisational cultures can create institutional discrimination
• Outreach and positive action are needed to counter disadvantage
• Information collection, consultation, policy evaluation and monitoring
Policy analysis and practice
• The territorial research community needs to provide support for territorial policy – but subject territorial policy to critical review
• What are the aims? Whose aims are they? What are the relations between aims, means and implementation?
• What are the unintended side-effects? What happens if no action is taken? Is it the policy – or other factors – that creates the output?
INTERREG
• Practice in INTERREG projects can benefit from stronger inputs from the territorial research community – yet is also an under-researched area
• Concern that INTERREG IV will become very topic based – and lose the integrative aspect that is vital to spatial planning
Connecting territorial research to the practice community
• Spatial planning practice in most countries is pragmatic and reactive to problems, rather than evidence-based policy-making
• ‘User-friendly’ interface with national, regional and local governments to make the connections
• Scope for ‘laboratory regions’?
Models of research influencing policy and practice
• Data collection and interpretation to reveal patterns, causes and remedies – e.g. public health movement in the 19th century
• Popular text that influences public opinion and the policy environment – e.g. “Silent Spring”
• Contesting paradigms at a time of crisis – e.g. Keynes / ‘the boys from Chicago’
• Socialisation of professionals through research-led teaching
Towards an innovative research and practice relation
• Innovation as a spiral of collective learning involving users rather than a straight line from laboratory to product
• Importance of tacit understanding and networks that can access knowledge from outside the organisation
• ESPON as a catalyst to build identity and strengthen networks and connections within the European territorial research community
Summary
• The territorial dimension of policy is weakly developed and still contested
• ESPON is a major achievement • Territorial research needs to probe
and make more robust key consensual concepts such as ‘territorial cohesion’ and ‘polycentric development’
• Stronger links can be made to policy and practice and the wider territorial research community