Towards a European Research and Practice Agenda Before...

1. A European Territorial Research CommunityUniversity of Luxembourg 13-14 October 2005Linking Territorial Research and Practice: An agenda for the futureCliff Hague

2. Towards a European Research and Practice AgendaBefore...

3. Towards a European Research and Practice Agenda!!!

4. 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?

5. 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

6. 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?)

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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?

11. 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

12. 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?

13. 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

14. 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’?

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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