This issue (5.2) of Transactions of AESOP brings together a selection of papers which address current themes and issues in planning education. Two of the papers reflect on the experience of teaching modules submitted to recent rounds of the AESOP Excellence in Teaching Award (ETA), one reports on an experience of internationalisation in planning education, and one is an invited paper by Andrea Frank the present Chair of the AESOP ETA Committee. They all provide original and insightful contributions addressing key themes in contemporary planning education including, the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, new technologies and modes of teaching delivery, the teaching of landscape in planning programmes, and, the internationalisation of planning cohorts and curricula.
This issue (5.1) of Transactions of AESOP brings together a selection of papers submitted to recent rounds of the Best AESOP Congress Paper Award and an invited paper by Tuna Taşan-Kok the Chair of the AESOP Congress Paper Award Committee. They provide original and insightful contributions addressing key themes in contemporary planning research and practice.
The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) (CEC, 1999) was a policy document produced and agreed jointly by EU governments during the 1990s with the support of the European Commission (Faludi and Waterhout, 2002). It was intended as an indicative framework to guide spatially significant public policy making in the EU at all spatial scales from the Community level, to the regional and local levels. A non-binding policy statement, the ESDP sought to guide institutions in the exercise of existing competences which influence spatial development and its application was to be through voluntary co-operation based on the principle of subsidiarity. Integrated application of the ESDP policy options was to be achieved by a reorientation of national spatial development policies and community sectoral policies, at three levels of spatial co-operation - the (European) Community Level; the transnational/national level; and, the regional/local level. In order to achieve this, the ESDP called for 'horizontal' co-operation between the authorities responsible for sectoral and spatial policies at each administrative level as well as 'vertical' co-operation between the different levels - for example, between the national and local level. The extent of its explicit and implicit application was the subject of academic and policymaker reflection in the years following its adoption (see ESPON, 2006) with its degree of influence being seen as variable across contexts and scales.
This special issue brings together a series of papers written in the period between the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the ESDP in Potsdam, Germany in 1999, and the adoption of the new EU Territorial Agenda 2030 (MRSPTDTC, 2020) in December 2020. This seemed an apposite moment to reflect on the legacies of the ESDP and the present and future prospects for European territorial development and urban policy.
This issue of Transactions of AESOP brings together a series of papers which reflect on the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) document which was adopted by the then member states of the European Union (EU) in Potsdam, Germany in 1999, and is published shortly after the adoption in December 2020 of a new EU Territorial Agenda 2030 document under the recent German EU Presidency. It features an introduction and five original papers which explore the legacies of the ESDP and the present and future prospects for European territorial development and urban policy.
This issue of Transactions of AESOP brings together a series of papers which reflect on the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) document which was adopted by the then member states of the European Union (EU) in Potsdam, Germany in 1999, and is published shortly after the adoption in December 2020 of a new EU Territorial Agenda 2030 document under the recent German EU Presidency. It features an introduction and five original papers which explore the legacies of the ESDP and the present and future prospects for European territorial development and urban policy.
The European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) (CEC, 1999) was a policy document produced and agreed jointly by EU governments during the 1990s with the support of the European Commission (Faludi and Waterhout, 2002). It was intended as an indicative framework to guide spatially significant public policy making in the EU at all spatial scales from the Community level, to the regional and local levels. A non-binding policy statement, the ESDP sought to guide institutions in the exercise of existing competences which influence spatial development and its application was to be through voluntary co-operation based on the principle of subsidiarity. Integrated application of the ESDP policy options was to be achieved by a reorientation of national spatial development policies and community sectoral policies, at three levels of spatial co-operation - the (European) Community Level; the transnational/national level; and, the regional/local level. In order to achieve this, the ESDP called for 'horizontal' co-operation between the authorities responsible for sectoral and spatial policies at each administrative level as well as 'vertical' co-operation between the different levels - for example, between the national and local level. The extent of its explicit and implicit application was the subject of academic and policymaker reflection in the years following its adoption (see ESPON, 2006) with its degree of influence being seen as variable across contexts and scales. This special issue brings together a series of papers written in the period between the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the ESDP in Potsdam, Germany in 1999, and the adoption of the new EU Territorial Agenda 2030 (MRSPTDTC, 2020) in December 2020. This seemed an apposite moment to reflect on the legacies of the ESDP and the present and future prospects for European territorial development and urban policy.
This topical book offers an analysis of the current state of the planning system in England and an evidence-based review of over a decade of change. With a critique of ongoing UK planning reforms, the book argues that the planning system is often blamed for a range of issues that are in fact the fault of ineffective policymaking.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Depuis le XIX ème siècle en Grande-Bretagne, les structures de gouvernement local ont été progressivement réformées pour répondre aux enjeux démocratiques, économiques, sociaux et territoriaux des aires urbaines. Dans les années 1970, les conseils de comtés métropolitains ont fait leur apparition dans les plus grandes agglomérations anglaises mais ont été supprimés dès les années 1980. Les années 1990 et 2000 ont vu l'émergence de structures de développement économique et d'aménagement du territoire à une échelle régionale supraurbaine. Depuis le milieu des années 2000, cependant, la ville-région monte de nouveau en puissance et, depuis 2010, de nouvelles structures appelées « autorités combinées » ont émergé à cette échelle dans un certain nombre de grandes agglomérations. Le développement des villes-régions est également lié à des initiatives de l'Etat visant à réduire les disparités de développement régional, notamment avec le dispositif de Northern Powerhouse . Ce papier analyse l'histoire du développement des villes et des régions en Angleterre et examine le développement actuel des institutions et initiatives des villes-régions.
In June 2016 a referendum was held in the UK on membership of the European Union. Two of the territories of the UK, England and Wales voted to leave the EU whilst two, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain. The overall result was a narrow UK vote to leave the EU. Perhaps the one thing that all sides in a now deeply divided state can agree on is that the decision to leave the EU is a momentous one. Internally the position of Scotland and Northern Ireland within the UK is a key issue. In England the status and role of London and other major cities (which also mostly voted to remain in the EU) in relation to other regions, is also a matter of debate (BBC News, 2016). Less attention has been given to the many and varied relationships that local authorities have developed with the EU since the UK joined the then EEC in the 1970s. The withdrawal will impact diverse areas of their work – for example, experts predict it will lead to a hollowing out of environmental protection (Travers, 2016). How it will affect the heritage sector however, has received scant attention in the referendum campaign and since the result. This Viewpoint provides some reflections on this issue.
The period since the 1960s has been characterised by growing societal concern with urban heritage protection and the development of legislative, fiscal and urban planning instruments that seek to ensure the protection and enhancement of historic buildings and environments. International organisations such as UNESCO and European level documents such as the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) have stressed the cultural and economic value of the 'wise management of natural and cultural heritage'. Since the 1970s many cities have sought to redefine and regenerate themselves through a revalorisation of their past and the protection and enhancement of their historic urban landscapes. Urban heritage has thus often come to be seen as a component of the territorial capital of places, and often had a symbiotic relationship with the objective of urban regeneration. However, urban heritage is not a static concept and ideas about what constitutes heritage, the value of different historic urban environments, and the contribution they can make to city development and regeneration continue to evolve. This paper reflects on this evolution in the context of the English planning system and illustrates some key trends and issues surrounding urban heritage through a consideration of recent and ongoing heritage related planning episodes in the northern English city of Liverpool.
The period since the 1960s has been characterised by growing societal concern with urban heritage protection and the development of legislative, fiscal and urban planning instruments that seek to ensure the protection and enhancement of historic buildings and environments. International organisations such as UNESCO and European level documents such as the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) have stressed the cultural and economic value of the 'wise management of natural and cultural heritage'. Since the 1970s many cities have sought to redefine and regenerate themselves through a revalorisation of their past and the protection and enhancement of their historic urban landscapes. Urban heritage has thus often come to be seen as a component of the territorial capital of places, and often had a symbiotic relationship with the objective of urban regeneration. However, urban heritage is not a static concept and ideas about what constitutes heritage, the value of different historic urban environments, and the contribution they can make to city development and regeneration continue to evolve. This paper reflects on this evolution in the context of the English planning system and illustrates some key trends and issues surrounding urban heritage through a consideration of recent and ongoing heritage related planning episodes in the northern English city of Liverpool.
