Territorial cohesion, polycentrism and regional disparities: revisiting an unsolved debate

Meijers, Evert; Sandberg, Krister

doi:10.4337/9781839103582.00020

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, we find that polycentric development can effectively reduce regional disparities for German urban regions, thereby achieving a more cohesive and balanced regional development as advocated by EU spatial planning policies. A similar conclusion was drawn by Meijers and Sandberg (2021) in a recent study that used panel models to analyze EU countries. Other studies conducted at regional scale, in the Czech Republic, Italy, and China, have suggested either insignificant or adverse effects of polycentrism on reducing regional disparities (Malý, 2016;Sun et al, 2019;Veneri and Burgalassi, 2012).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…Meijers and Sandberg (2008) conducted one of the earliest studies for EU countries and found no significant relationship between the two. However, a recent update by the authors using panel model and more robust polycentricity measures found that polycentricity could indeed reduce regional disparities (Meijers and Sandberg, 2021). Malý (2016) examined functional regions in the Czech Republic and suggested that the relationship depends on the indicators to measure regional disparities.…”

Section: Polycentricity and Regional Inequalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can polycentric urban development simultaneously achieve both economic growth and regional equity? A multi-scale analysis of German regions

Li,

Schmidt,

Siedentop

2023

Environ Plan A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polycentric urban regions have been advocated for, and justified as enhancing both economic growth and overall competitiveness while also creating more equitable and balanced metropolitan regions. We examine the role of regional polycentricity in effectuating certain desirable outcomes, specifically enhancing economic productivity and minimizing spatial disparities simultaneously in German urban regions ( Großstadtregionen) as a case study. Using econometric analysis of both functional and morphological polycentricity measures, our results indicate that polycentric development can effectively reduce regional disparities in urban regions, but not simultaneously promote economic productivity. These findings confirm previous studies that progress toward one goal hampers progress toward another. Further investigation at a finer scale suggests that the borrowed size effect is essentially a “win-loss” game between peripheries and urban core(s) within the same urban region. Peripheries benefit from the spillovers generated by nearby urban core(s), thereby narrowing regional economic gaps and leading to more equitable regions. However, the gains of the peripheries are canceled out by the losses of the urban cores, and polycentric development has an insignificant overall effect on regional economic productivity.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Polycentricity and Regional Inequalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can polycentric urban development simultaneously achieve both economic growth and regional equity? A multi-scale analysis of German regions

Li,

Schmidt,

Siedentop

2023

Environ Plan A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first set of approaches examine the deviation of observed variables of interest from a perfectly even distribution. These methods include GINI, Theil, and the coefficient of variation (Meijers and Sandberg, 2006). However, observed city regions are not expected to be perfectly evenly distributed because of agglomeration effects.…”

Section: Methodological Issues In Operationalizing Polycentricitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 1999 European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), which offered guidance for “sectoral policies with significant spatial impacts,” first linked polycentric urban forms, economic competitiveness, and deconcentrating economic growth (Commission of the European Communities, 1999: 11). A wave of Euro-centric research on polycentricity followed, refining methods for scoring regions and investigating the connection between polycentric urban form and desirable social, environmental, and economic outcomes (see, among many others, Aguilera, 2005; Hall and Pain, 2006; Kloosterman and Lambregts, 2001; Kloosterman and Musterd, 2001; Lambregts, 2009; Meijers, 2008; Meijers and Sandberg, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward comparative polycentricity scores: Assessing variations in regional delineation and subcenter identification

Thomas

Schmidt

Siedentop

2021

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban spatial structure is increasingly characterized by polycentricity, the presence of multiple interconnected centers of similar size. Polycentricity indicators, which influence research and policies related to urban development, rely on three phases of analysis: (a) delineating regions, (b) identifying subcenters within these regions, and (c) operationalizing polycentricity; and each phase contains decision points for analysts. This paper argues that polycentricity methodologies should be thought of in terms of pathways, then systematically applies 15 such pathways to the case of German regional polycentricity and compares the results. Findings suggest that questions of polycentricity are more robustly measured by comparing across multiple regional delineation methods and selection of subcenters, then looking for signs of agreement or disagreement. When possible, constructing regions from larger areas through bottom-up methods tends to avoid the biases of administratively defined regions. When this is not possible, statistical approaches to subcenter identification can serve as a check to avoid forced selection of subcenters in poorly defined regions.

show abstract

Breaking with the spatial-cycle model: the shift towards ‘syncurbanization’ in polycentric urban regions

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper criticizes traditional models of urban-regional expansion, which depart from monocentric ideals of urban core and ring. The original spatial-cycle model (SCM) suggests repeating stages of urbanization, suburbanization, disurbanization and re-urbanization. We reconceptualize the relations between core(s) and ring(s) to test the formation of urban regions under mono-, multi-and polycentric trajectories. The analysis employs local population data in functional urban regions in Finland, Austria and the Netherlands, three countries with different urbanization patterns, for the period 1961-2011. Results suggest a 'break of the cycle' in polycentric regions and a shift towards a different period, which we call 'syncurbanization'.

show abstract

Territorial cohesion, polycentrism and regional disparities: revisiting an unsolved debate

Cited by 4 publications

References 17 publications

Can polycentric urban development simultaneously achieve both economic growth and regional equity? A multi-scale analysis of German regions

Can polycentric urban development simultaneously achieve both economic growth and regional equity? A multi-scale analysis of German regions

Toward comparative polycentricity scores: Assessing variations in regional delineation and subcenter identification

Breaking with the spatial-cycle model: the shift towards ‘syncurbanization’ in polycentric urban regions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About