Abstract
Political developments in Central Europe at the end of the 20th century and the start of the 21st century, connected with the enlargement of the European Union, an ongoing European integration, and overall deep-reaching transformation processes, combined to broaden the discussion on the new spatial quality and spatial organization of societal activities in regions along borders of national states within and at the periphery of the EU. The enlargement of the Schengen zone in particular brought a crucial lowering of barrier effects, increased the permeability of national borders and opened territories to new functional and spatial structures. This permeability, in combination with a rapid increase in the complexity of territorially defined socio-ecosystems of regions and their forthcoming integration, introduced new opportunities for societal development. Yet it also increased the vulnerability of their social and biophysical systems to disturbances — economic crises, crime, floods, fires and epidemics. This fact has also been reflected in the Territorial Agenda 2020 of the European Union (Commission of the European Communities 2011), referring to growing vulnerability and disturbances experienced by local and regional communities, in some cases threatening the prosperity, sustainability and stability of cities and regions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. (2007), The fluid scales and scope of UK spatial planning. Environment and PlanningA 39: 1478–95.
Andersson, K. and Ostrom, E. (2006), An analytical agenda for the study of decentralized resource regimes. Working Paper 06 ( Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Indiana University, Bloomington ).
Bache, I. and Flinders, M. (2004), Multi-level governance: conclusions and implications, in Multi-Level Governance, Bache, I. and Flinders, M. (eds) ( Oxford University Press: New York ), 195–206.
Burger, M. and Meijers, E. (2012), Form follows function? Linking morphological and functional polycentricity. Urban Studies 49 (5): 1127–49.
City of Bratislava (2013), Bratislava Umland Management, www.projekt-baum.eu (accessed 20 March 2014).
Commission of the European Communities (2011), Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020–Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions ( Brussels/Gödöllö: European Union).
Davoudi, S. (2003), Polycentricity in European spatial planning: From an analytical tool to a normative agenda. European Planning Studies 11 (8): 979–99.
De Roo, G. and Porter, G. (2007), Fuzzy Planning: The Role of Actors in a Fuzzy ( Aldershot: Ashgate).
EMPIRICA (1993), Produktionsstandorte in West- und Osteuropa–Ein Regionalführer für Investoren, EG, EFTA, Mittel- und Osteuropa ( Bonn: EMPIRICA).
Finka, M. (2006), Koncept polycentricity v súčasnej teôrií a politike priestorového rozvoja, in Trajektórie fizemného rozvoja ( Bratislava: ROAD).
Finka, M. (2013), Specifics and recent development of Central European planning structure, 10th SPA-CE.net Conference, 25–27 September 2013 (Dresden: the Leibniz Institute of Urban and Regional Development (IOER)).
Finka, M., Kluvánková- Oravská, T., Ondrejička, V., Kozová, M., Petríková, D., Ivanička, K., Jamečný, L’., Jaššo, M., Zúbková, M., Ladzianska, Z., Špirková, D., Pavličková, K., and Pauditšová, E. (2011), The settlement infrastructure development of the knowledge based society, Final Report ( Bratislava: SPECTRA Centre of Excellence of the EU).
Finka, M. and Kluvankova, T. (2015), Managing Complexity of Urban Systems: A Polycentric Approach Land Use Policy, pp. 602–608. DOI information: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.09.016.
Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2003), Unravelling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. The American Political Science Review 97: 233–234.
Hudec, M. and Vujošević, M. (2010), Integration of a fuzzy system and an information system for the territorial units ranking, ICEIS 2007–Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Volume AIDSS (Funchal, Madeira, Portugal, 12–16 June 2007 ), 374–7.
Jordan, A. (2008), The governance of sustainable development: taking stock and looking forwards. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 26: 17–33.
Kern, K. and Bulkeley, H. (2009), Cities, Europeanization and multi-level governance: governing climate change through transnational municipal networks. JCMS 47 (2): 309–332.
Kloosterman, R. C. and Musterd, S. (2001), The polycentric urban region: Towards a research agenda. Urban Studies 38 (4): 623–33.
Kluvánková-Oravská, T., Chobotová, V. and Smolková, E. (2013), The Challenges of Policy Convergence: The Europeanization of Biodiversity Governance in an Enlarging EU. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2013, 31: 401–413. DOI:10.1068/c1034j.
Law Nr. 369/1990 Zb. §20b–f (1990), The Law on Municipalities ( Bratislava: National Council of SR).
McGinnis, M. D. (1999), Polycentric Governance and Development: Readings from the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis ( Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press).
Ostrom, E. (2010), Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review 100 (3): 641–72.
Ostrom, E., Schroeder, L. and Wynne, S. (1993), Theoretical Lenses on Public Policy ( New York: Westview Press).
Paavola, J. (2011), Climate Change: The Ultimate Tragedy of the Commons? Sustainable Research Institute Paper No. 24. ( The Center for Climate Change Economics and Policy, University of Leeds, UK ), 32.
Rosenau, J. (1997), Along the domestic — foreign frontier. Exploring governance in a turbulent world ( Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Reckien, D., Flacke, J., Dawson, R. J., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, M., Foley, A., Hamann, J. J. P., Orru, H., Salvia, M., De Gregorio, S., Geneletti, D. and Pietrapertosa, F. (2014), Climate change response in Europe: what is the reality? Analyses of adaptation and mitigation plans from 200 urban areas and 11 countries. Clim. Change 122: 331–340.
Steis, R. (1985), Novÿ urbanizmus ( Bratislava: Vydavatel’stvo Veda).
Turok, I. and Bailey, N. (2001), Central Scotland as a polycentric urban region: Useful planning concept of chimera. Urban Studies 38 (4): 697–715.
URBION (1988), Amendment of the Project of Urbanization ( Bratislava: URBION).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2015 Maroš Finka, Tatiana Kluvánková and Vladimir Ondrejička
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Finka, M., Kluvánková, T., Ondrejička, V. (2015). Concept of Polycentric Governance for Fuzzy Soft Spaces as a Challenge for Central European Peripheral Spaces. In: Lang, T., Henn, S., Sgibnev, W., Ehrlich, K. (eds) Understanding Geographies of Polarization and Peripheralization. New Geographies of Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137415080_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137415080_17
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-57975-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-41508-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social Sciences CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)