IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cpprxx/v28y2013i1p141-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Neo-liberalization Processes and Spatial Planning in France, Germany, and the Netherlands: An Exploration

Author

Listed:
  • Bas Waterhout
  • Frank Othengrafen
  • Olivier Sykes

Abstract

'Is the English experience distinctive?' It is this question, asked by the guest editors of this Special Issue, that triggered this article focusing on the impact of neo-liberal ideologies on planning in Germany, France, and the Netherlands. The multi-faceted concept of neo-liberalism is used here as a perspective to interpret the recent developments in the three countries. Proposed changes to planning in England are also briefly considered. Although there are clear differences in the magnitude and actual manifestation of neo-liberalism in planning across the analyzed countries, with England clearly showing some of the more radical and disruptive effects, there seems to be a clear direction in which planning in North West Europe is heading. Due to processes of globalization, individualization, and Europeanization, questions also arise in each country regarding the position and objectives of planning. Neo-liberalization processes tend to further accentuate these questions as planning more often than not is grounded on a different set of principles. Yet, this does not necessarily completely dissociate planning from neo-liberalism. In particular, the French and German experiences indicate that even in broadly 'neo-liberal times', there is still a demand for spatial planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Bas Waterhout & Frank Othengrafen & Olivier Sykes, 2013. "Neo-liberalization Processes and Spatial Planning in France, Germany, and the Netherlands: An Exploration," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 141-159, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cpprxx:v:28:y:2013:i:1:p:141-159
    DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2012.699261
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02697459.2012.699261
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02697459.2012.699261?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhou, Tianxiao & Tan, Rong & Shu, Xianfan, 2022. "Rigidity with partial elasticity: Local government adaptation under the centralized land quota system in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Simin Yan & Anna Growe, 2022. "Regional Planning, Land-Use Management, and Governance in German Metropolitan Regions—The Case of Rhine–Neckar Metropolitan Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    3. Evgeny M. Bukhvald, 2020. "Managing the spatial development of the Russian economy: Goals and tools," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 11(6), pages 2-14, December.
    4. Marco Bontje, 2024. "Multiscalar Governance of Shrinkage in the Netherlands: Past, Present… Future?," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9.
    5. Tianxiao Zhou, 2022. "Central–Local Relations in Land Planning Governance in Contemporary China: A Review from the Structural, Process, and Cultural Perspectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Bouwmeester, Josje & Gerber, Jean-David & Hartmann, Thomas & Ay, Deniz, 2023. "Non-compliance and non-enforcement: An unexpected outcome of flexible soft densification policy in the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    7. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Lorena Fiorini & Cristina Montaldi, 2022. "Micromunicipality (MM) and Inner Areas in Italy: A Challenge for National Land Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Feitelson, Eran & Horowitz-Harel, Anat & Levin, Noam & Mintz, Zvi & Steenekamp, Guy & Zaban, Shaul, 2021. "Haste makes waste: On the implications of rapid planning in Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    9. Graham Haughton & Phil Allmendinger, 2016. "Think tanks and the pressures for planning reform in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1676-1692, December.
    10. Kristian Olesen, 2020. "Infrastructure imaginaries: The politics of light rail projects in the age of neoliberalism," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(9), pages 1811-1826, July.
    11. Broitman, Dani & Ben-Haim, Yakov, 2022. "Forecasting residential sprawl under uncertainty: An info-gap analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    12. Talia Margalit & Nurit Alfasi, 2016. "The undercurrents of entrepreneurial development: Impressions from a globalizing city," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(10), pages 1967-1987, October.
    13. Petersen, Jens-Phillip & Heurkens, Erwin, 2018. "Implementing energy policies in urban development projects: The role of public planning authorities in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 275-289.
    14. Kristian Olesen & Helen Carter, 2018. "Planning as a barrier for growth: Analysing storylines on the reform of the Danish Planning Act," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(4), pages 689-707, June.
    15. Sergio Segura & Belen Pedregal, 2017. "Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Spatial Plans: A Spanish Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-19, September.
    16. Mario Reimer, 2013. "Planning Cultures in Transition: Sustainability Management and Institutional Change in Spatial Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(11), pages 1-21, November.
    17. Jessica Ferm & Ben Clifford & Patricia Canelas & Nicola Livingstone, 2021. "Emerging problematics of deregulating the urban: The case of permitted development in England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(10), pages 2040-2058, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cpprxx:v:28:y:2013:i:1:p:141-159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cppr20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.