No abstract

Rapid expansion of settlements and related infrastructures is a global trend that comes with severe environmental, economic, and social costs. Steering urbanization toward well-balanced compactness is thus acknowledged as an important strategic orientation in UN Sustainable Development Goal 11 (SDG-11) via the SDG-indicator “Ratio of land consumption rate to population growth rate.” The EU’s simultaneous commitment to being “a frontrunner in implementing […] the SDGs” and to striving for “no net land take until 2050” calls for relating the concepts of land consumption and land take to each other. Drawing on an EU-centred questionnaire study, a focus group and a literature review, we scrutinize definitions of land consumption and land take, seeking to show how they are interrelated, and questioning the comparability of respective indicators. We argue that conceptual clarifications and a bridging of the two notions are much needed, and that the precision required for definitions and applications is context-dependent. While approximate understandings may suffice for general communication and dissemination objectives, accurate and consistent interpretations of the discussed concepts seem indispensable for monitoring and reporting purposes. We propose ways of addressing existing ambiguities and suggest prioritizing the term land take in the EU context. Thereby, we aim to enhance conceptual clarity around land consumption and land take—a precondition for solidly informing respective policies and decisions.

This paper aims at identifying the current main economic thought influencing the EU Cohesion Policy. Postulates and assumptions on how economic growth spreads spatially in key EU policy framework documents are discussed and compared to different economic theories. Strategic EU documents increasingly foster the urban dimension, and focus resources on cities at the expense of cohesive regional development. The findings indicate large overlaps with Perroux' 'growth pole theory'. However, several of the key assumptions of growth pole theory are not met in the new context of post-industrial globalized service economy, which is fundamentally different from its original use. This is a troublesome finding when seen from a strategic planning perspective. Current implications for regional policy and planning boil down to the cardinal question of supporting urban areas and/or peripheries. Taking the strategic EU policy documents and their trajectories in economic thought into consideration, this paper confirms that regional development focuses on cities. Yet, it suggests a new perspective on an urban-centred EU Cohesion Policy, one that normatively requests the 'responsibility' of cities towards their hinterland, instead of fostering a further dissociation of cities from their hinterland. This suggests a reorientation towards supporting the linkages between urban areas and peripheries.

This paper discusses Social Services of General Interest, a political term of the European Union, which lies at the heart of the European Model of Society and Cohesion concepts. How and why is the organization and provision of services across Europe rooted in, and shaped by, the prevailing national constitutional components of social welfare and spatial planning systems? A high degree of interrelation between these two systems is confirmed and Social Services of General Interest are detected and conceptualized as a substantiation of components of both systems. In a concluding step, an analytical framework is introduced which enables us to research Social Services of General Interest from different angles for the purpose of deploying promising policy solutions.