Suchergebnisse

AbstractParallel to the proliferation of cross‐border regional cooperation initiatives in the European Union, increasing scholarly attention has been given to conceptualizing cross‐border governance in recent decades. In line with the recognition that cross‐border regions have not undermined the significance of nation‐state spaces but have added to their complexity, conceptual frameworks of analysis have become more and more refined. However, studies still tend to be framed in one spatial grammar, that of territory, scale or network, and fail to consider the ways in which these different dimensions become interlocked. The aim of this article is to address this lack by developing a multidimensional perspective, in order to finally circumvent state‐centric thinking on cross‐border regions and to offer a more nuanced account of whether and how new imaginaries of spatial governance institutionalize. These arguments are demonstrated by means of a case study of cross‐border regional governance in the Dutch–German–Belgian borderlands.

This paper is concerned with the implications of state territorial decentralization for the management of uneven regional development and spatial justice. It is argued that accounts of post-1997 UK devolution and the treatment of 'the English question' with a similar concern have tended to dismiss government policies against the backdrop of an uncritical view of spatial Keynesianism. Furthermore, these accounts have not succeeded in capturing the interconnectedness of the issues of democracy, solidarity, and spatial justice. In order to address these shortcomings I elaborate on a perspective that draws on insights of postfoundational political thought and interprets justice as democratic practice. This perspective reminds us that any notion of solidarity between people sharing a 'national space' and, consequently, any understanding of spatial justice is always politically constructed. Accordingly, the main task becomes to 'unimagine' the nation as a community of pregiven interests and to examine the obstacles to a meaningful debate on the institutional supports of solidarity.

The increasing dominance of neoliberalism as the key steering mechanism of the European Union (EU) since the early 1990s has implied the competitiveness-oriented reshaping of cohesion policy. The aim of this paper is to initiate a debate from a critical political economic perspective on the implications of this shift for Central Eastern European (CEE) member states. To this end, the paper discusses the formation of EU centre-periphery relations from a CEE point of view and formulates some preliminary suggestions as to how cohesion policy would need to be rethought in order to ensure the better integration of lagging CEE regions.

This paper aims at expanding the scope of the dominantly pragmatic, local scale-oriented smart village scholarship towards a perspective that recognizes that smart village development is a multiscalar political process. To show the necessity of this move, the shaping of smart village policies and practices in Hungary is examined through a qualitative lens. As the authors argue, path-dependent structural obstacles and interscalar relations undermine the prospects of smart village building in the sense of bottom-up integrated rural development, and there is a risk of a bias towards technological innovation. This exploratory article, using Hungary as a case study, argues that smart village scholarship should draw on the results of critical smart city scholarship to acquire in-depth understanding of current debates regarding potential smart village developments.