Metadata language
How can comparative spatial planning studies contribute to European Union Cohesion?
Subtitle: Creator: Publisher: Place of publishing: Date issued/created: Description: Abstract:
The aim of this article is to identify the relevance and possible application of comparative spatialplanning research in the context of the EU’s territorial cohesion themes. Research questions formulated were as follows: (1) what are the key considerations and methods for making comparisons between spatial planning systems?; (2) how is the legal and institutional context addressed in comparative research?; and (3) how can the comparative research on spatial-planning systems that is (or can be) carried out translate into the objectives of EU policy on territorial cohesion? This article represents an overview in the above context. It first relates the objectives and specificities of cohesion policy as defined in the literature to the research challenges. It then identifies the main reasons (also noted in the literature) for spatial-planning issues to be made subject to comparison, the methodological challenges in so doing, and the specificity present as legal and institutional conditions are compared. A basis is in this way provided for an indication of the relationship pertaining between comparative research and the developmentof territorial cohesion.
Alterman, R. (2010). Takings international: A comparative perspective on land use regulations and compensation rights. New York., London: American Bar Association.
Altrock, U., Güntner, S., Huning, S., & Peters, D. (2016). Spatial planning and urban development in the new EU member states: From adjustment to reinvention. London: Routledge.
Berisha, E., Cotella, G., Janin Rivolin, U., & Solly, A. (2021). Spatial governance and planning systems in the public control of spatial development: A European typology. European Planning Studies, 29(1), 181-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1726295
Blanc, F., & Cotella, G. (2020). Testing comparative spatial planning studies in the Latin American context: Theoretical implications and challenges for regional development. Redes, 25(3), 1032-1050. https://doi.org/10.17058/redes.v25i3.15249
Böhme, K., & Redlich, S. (2023). The territorial agenda 2030 for places and a more cohesive European territory? Planning Practice & Research, 38(5), 729-747. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2023.2258029
Booth, P. (2011). Culture, planning and path dependence: Some reflections on the problems of comparison. Town Planning Review, 82(1), 13-28. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.4
Booth, P. (Ed.). (2007). Spatial planning systems of Britain and France: A comparative analysis. Routledge, London.
Bourne, L., Davies, H., Faludi, A., Kunzmann, K. R., Nagamine, H., & Masser, I. (1984). Cross national comparative planning studies: Commentary. The Town Planning Review, 55(2), 150-160.
Chen, F., Ludwig, C., & Sykes, O. (2021). Heritage Conservation through Planning: A Comparison of Policies and Principles in England and China. Planning Practice & Research, 36(5), 578-601. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2020.1752472
Čok, G., Foški, M., Zavodnik Lamovšek, A., Mrak, G., Jopek, D., Kochel, L., & Szlenk-Dziubek, D. (2024). Planning in Poland and Slovenia - Introduction to Comparative Analysis of Spatial Planning Systems at the Local Level. Europa XXI, 46, 71-91. https://doi.org/10.7163/Eu21.2024.46.3
Cordes, M. (1989). Policing Bias and Conflicts of Interest in Zoning Decisionmaking. North Dakota Law Review, 65(2), 161-218.
Cotella, G. (2019). The Urban Dimension of EU Cohesion Policy. In E., Medeiros (Ed.). Territorial Cohesion (pp. 133-151). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03386-6_7
Cotella, G., & Rivolin, U. J. (2024). The Europeanization of territorial governance. Towards a typology. Planning Practice & Research, 40(2), 263-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2024.2431770
Cotella, G., Janin Rivolin, U., Pede, E., & Pioletti, M. (2021). Multi-level regional development governance: A European typology. European Spatial Research and Policy, 28(1), 201-221. https://doi.org/10.18778/1231-1952.28.1.11
Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G. D., Wilkinson, C., Fünfgeld, H., McEvoy, D., Porter, L., & Davoudi, S. (2012). Resilience: A Bridging Concept or a Dead End? "Reframing" Resilience: Challenges for Planning Theory and Practice Interacting Traps: Resilience Assessment of a Pasture Management System in Northern Afghanistan Urban Resilience: What Does it Mean in Planning Practice? Resilience as a Useful Concept for Climate Change Adaptation? The Politics of Resilience for Planning: A Cautionary Note: Edited by Simin Davoudi and Libby Porter. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 299-333. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124
Dembski, S., & O'Brien, P. (2020). The myth of zoning: The European experience. Town and Country Planning, 2020(Aug), 281-284.
Dembski, S., Sykes, O., Couch, C., Desjardins, X., Evers, D., Osterhage, F., Siedentop, S., & Zimmermann, K. (2021). Reurbanisation and suburbia in Northwest Europe: A comparative perspective on spatial trends and policy approaches. Progress in Planning, 150, 100462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2019.100462
Demeterova, B., Goodwin-Hawkins, B., & Fischer, T. (2020). Conceptualisations of Territorial Cohesion in Central European border regions. European Planning Studies, 28(12), 2287-2306. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1716692
Elinbaum, P., & Galland, D. (2016). Analysing Contemporary Metropolitan Spatial Plans in Europe Through Their Institutional Context, Instrumental Content and Planning Process. European Planning Studies, 24(1), 181-206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1036843
EU Ministers (2016). Urban Agenda for the EU 'Pact of Amsterdam'. Agreed at the Informal Meeting of EU Ministers Responsible for Urban Matters. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/ sources/policy/themes/urban-development/agenda/pact-of-amsterdam.pdf
EU Ministers (2020). Territorial Agenda 2030 - A future for all places. Retrieved from https://www.territorialagenda.eu/files/agenda_theme/agenda_data/Territorial%20Agenda%20documents/TerritorialAgenda2030_201201.pdf
EU Ministers (2020).The New Leipzig Charter - The transformative power of cities for the common good. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/brochure/new_leipzig_charter/new_leipzig_charter_en.pdf
Faludi, A. (2006). From European spatial development to territorial cohesion policy. Regional Studies, 40(6), 667-678. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343400600868937
Garau, C., Desogus, G., & Stratigea, A. (2024). Territorial cohesion in insular contexts: Assessing external attractiveness and internal strength of major Mediterranean islands. European Planning Studies, 32(2), 234-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1840524
Hague, R., & Harrop, M. (2010). Comparative government and politics: An introduction (8th ed). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Hantrais, L. (2008). International Comparative Research: Theory, Methods and Practice (1st ed). New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-06884-2
Healey, P., & Upton, R. (Eds.). (2010). Crossing borders: International exchange and planning practices. London: Routledge.
Janin Rivolin, U. (2008). Conforming and Performing Planning Systems in Europe: An Unbearable Cohabitation. Planning Practice and Research, 23(2), 167-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697450802327081
Kantor, P., & Savitch, H. V. (2005). How to Study Comparative Urban Development Politics: A Research Note. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2005.00575.x
Knieling, J., & Othengrafen, F. (2009). Planning cultures in Europe: Decoding cultural phenomena in urban and regional planning. London: Ashgate Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1018404
Knieling, J., & Othengrafen, F. (2015). Planning Culture - A Concept to Explain the Evolution of Planning Policies and Processes in Europe? European Planning Studies, 23(11), 2133-2147. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1018404
Knippschild, R. (2011). Cross-Border Spatial Planning: Understanding, Designing and Managing Cooperation Processes in the German-Polish-Czech Borderland. European Planning Studies, 19(4), 629-645. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.548464
Lukstiņa, G., Šavraka, I., Cimdiņš, R., & Zadovskis, G. (2024). Spatial Planning and Urban Sprawl in Latvia: A Case of 'Pierīga' Status, Opinions and Future Perspectives. Europa XXI, 46, 31-54. https://doi.org/10.7163/Eu21.2024.46.5
Maier, K. (2012). Europeanization and Changing Planning in East-Central Europe: An Easterner's View. Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2012.661596
Masser, I., Bourne, L., Davies, H., Faludi, A., Kunzmann, K. R., Nagamine, H., & Masser, I. (1984). Cross national comparative planning studies: A review. Town Planning Review, 55(2), 137. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.55.2.n85617l5m665j585
Medeiros, E., Zaucha, J., & Ciołek, D. (2023). Measuring territorial cohesion trends in Europe: A correlation with EU Cohesion Policy. European Planning Studies, 31(9), 1868-1884. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2022.2143713
Mell, I., Allin, S., Reimer, M., & Wilker, J. (2017). Strategic green infrastructure planning in Germany and the UK: A transnational evaluation of the evolution of urban greening policy and practice. International Planning Studies, 22(4), 333-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2017.1291334
Nadin, V. (2012). International Comparative Planning Methodology: Introduction to the Theme Issue. Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2012.669928
Nadin, V., & Stead, D. (2008). European Spatial Planning Systems, Social Models and Learning. disP - The Planning Review, 44(172), 35-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2008.10557001
Nadin, V., Cotella, G., & Schmitt, P. (Eds.). (2024). Spatial planning systems in Europe: Comparison and trajectories. London: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Nadin, V., Fernández Maldonado, A. M., Zonneveld, W., Stead, D., Dąbrowski, M., Piskorek, K., Sarkar, A., Schmitt, P., Smas, L., & Cotella, G. (2018). COMPASS - Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe: Applied Research 2016-2018. ESPON. Retrieved from https://archive.espon.eu/sites/default/files/attachments/1.%20COMPASS_Final_Report.pdf
Needham, B., Buitelaar, E., & Hartmann, T. (2018). Planning, Law and Economics: The Rules We Make for Using Land (2. ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315111278
Newman, P., & Thornley, A. (2002). Urban Planning in Europe (0 ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203427941
Nowak, M. J. (Ed.). (2025). The Protection of Green Spaces for Climate Change Adaptation. Planning Systems, Policies and Instruments. New York (NY): Routledge.
Nowak, M. J., & Rocco, R. (2024). Opportunities and barriers related to the implementation of the Right to the City concept in the Brazilian and Polish urban planning system. A comparative study. Europa XXI, 46, 93-110. https://doi.org/10.7163/Eu21.2024.46.7
Nowak, M. J., & Szlachta, J. (2021). Agenda Terytorialna Unii Europejskiej 2030 a lokalne polityki przestrzenne w Polsce. Samorząd Terytorialny, 12, 7-18.
Nowak, M. J., Dühr, S., Peña, S., Batsuuri, B., Fast, V., Fidélis, T., Gagakuma, D., He, Z., Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R., Legutko-Kobus, P., De Marchi Moyano, B., Sugar, M., Peres, O. M., & Blaszke, M. (2024a). An international comparison of the scope and instruments of local spatial planning. Town Planning Review, 95(2), 197-217. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2023.40
Nowak, M. J., Mitrea, A., Kovács, K. F., Jurgenson, E., Legutko-Kobus, P., Petrisor, A.-I., Simeonova, V., & Blaszke, M. (2024b). Uncovering Spatial Planning Values through Law: Insights from Central East European Planning Systems. Europa XXI, 47, 23-42. https://doi.org/10.7.7163/Eu21.2024.47.8
Nowak, M. J., Mitrea, A., Lukstiņa, G., Jukneliene, D., Jürgenson, E., Filepné Kovács, K., Ladzianska, Z., Maruniak, E., Palekha, Y., Petrişor, A.-I., Põdra, K., Przedańska, J., Sârbu, C. N., Simeonova, V., Valciukiene, J., Yanchev, P., & Blaszke, M. (2024c). Directions of change in spatial planning systems in Central and Eastern Europe after 1989. Planning Practice & Research, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2024.2407229
Nowak, M. J., Mitrea, A., Lukstiņa, G., Petrişor, A.-I., Filepné Kovács, K., Simeonova, V., Yanchev, P., Jürgenson, E., Põdra, K., Řezáč, V., Mikalauskaite, K., Pranevičienė, B., Ladzianska, Z., & Baloga, M. (2023). Spatial Planning Systems in Central and Eastern European Countries: Review and Comparison of Selected Issues. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42722-0
OECD. (2017). Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD: Country Fact Sheets. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268579-en
Peric Momcilovic, A., & Hoch, C. (2017). Spatial planning across European planning systems and social models: A look through the lens of planning cultures of Switzerland, Greece and Serbia. In J., Antunes Ferreira, J. M., Simões, S., Morgado, E., Marques da Costa, J., Cabral, I., Loupa Ramos, J., Batista e Silva & M., Baptista-Bastos (Eds.). Book of Proceedings: AESOP 2017 Conference "Spaces of Dialog for Places of Dignity: Fostering the European Dimension of Planning" (pp. 1247-1258). Lisbon: Universidade de Lisboa. https://doi.org/10.3929/ETHZ-B-000226627
Purkarthofer, E. (2018). Understanding Europeanisation from Within: The Interpretation, Implementation and Instrumentalisation of European Spatial Planning in Austria and Finland. Doctoral Thesis, Aalto University.
Reimer, M., & Blotevogel, H. H. (2012). Comparing Spatial Planning Practice in Europe: A Plea for Cultural Sensitization. Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2012.659517
Roodbol-Mekkes, P. H., & Van den Brink, A. (2015). Rescaling Spatial Planning: Spatial Planning Reforms in Denmark, England, and the Netherlands. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(1), 184-198. https://doi.org/10.1068/c12134
Stead, D., & Cotella, G. (2011). Differential Europe: Domestic Actors and Their Role in Shaping Spatial Planning Systems. disP - The Planning Review, 47(186), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2011.10557140
Stead, D., De Vries, J., & Tasan-Kok, T. (2015). Planning Cultures and Histories: Influences on the Evolution of Planning Systems and Spatial Development Patterns. European Planning Studies, 23(11), 2127-2132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1016402
Steele, W., & Ruming, K. J. (2012). Flexibility versus Certainty: Unsettling the Land-use Planning Shibboleth in Australia. Planning Practice and Research, 27(2), 155-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2012.662670
Sykes, O. (2008). The Importance of Context and Comparison in the Study of European Spatial Planning. European Planning Studies, 16(4), 537-555. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310801983464
Sykes, O., & Dembski, S. (2019). Cross-national comparative research in planning-some things to consider. Town and Country Planning, 88(7), 312-319.
Sykes, O., Shaw, D., & Webb, B. (2023). International Planning Studies: An Introduction. Singapore: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5407-8
Szlachta, J. (2011). Spójność terytorialna traktatowym wymiarem polityki strukturalnej Unii Europejskiej. Prace i Materiały Instytutu Rozwoju Gospodarczego SGH, 85, 191-214.
Szlachta, J., & Nowak, M. (2021). Europeizacja polityki przestrzennej Polski w konsekwencji postanowień Krajowego Planu Odbudowy i Zwiększania Odporności (KPO) 2021-2026. Reflection Papers KPZK PAN, 3. Retrieved from https://kpzk.pan.pl/images/Reflection_paper_nr_3.pdf
Szlachta, J., & Zaucha, J. (2015). Role of territorial cohesion in pursuing development policies in Europe and in Poland. Working Papers, 1509. Institute for Development.
Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., & Verweij, S. (2020). Comparative Planning Research, Learning, and Governance: The Benefits and Limitations of Learning Policy by Comparison. Urban Planning, 5(1), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v5i1.2656
Zagrzejewska, M. (2014). Spójność terytorialna - wyzwanie dla badań statystycznych. Biuletyn Komitetu Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania Kraju PAN, 255, 144-154.
Zaucha, J., & Böhme, K. (2020). Measuring territorial cohesion is not a mission impossible. European Planning Studies, 28(3), 627-649. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1607827
Zimmermann, K., & Feiertag, P. (2021). Governance and City Regions: Policy and Planning in Europe (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003201922
Zimmermann, K., & Feiertag, P. (2024). Regional Planning in France and Germany: Towards convergence? Europa XXI, 46, 11-30. https://doi.org/10.7163/Eu21.2024.46.1
Zimmermann, K., & Momm, S. (2022). Planning systems and cultures in global comparison. The case of Brazil and Germany. International Planning Studies, 27(3), 213-230. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2022.2042212
Zimmermann, K., Diller, C., & Othengrafen, F. (2023). Planungssysteme vergleichen - aber wie? disP - The Planning Review, 59(2), 38-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2023.2257487
1429-7132 (print) ; 2300-8547 (online ; 10.7.7163/Eu21.2023.44.10
Source:CBGiOŚ. IGiPZ PAN, call nos.: Cz.6406, Cz.6407 ; click here to follow the link
Language: Language of abstract: Rights:Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 license
Terms of use:Copyright-protected material. [CC BY 4.0] May be used within the scope specified in Creative Commons Attribution BY 4.0 license, full text available at: ; -
Digitizing institution:Institute of Geography and Spatial Organization of the Polish Academy of Sciences
Original in: Projects co-financed by:European Union. European Regional Development Fund ; Programme Innovative Economy, 2010-2014, Priority Axis 2. R&D infrastructure
Access: