IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6958-d1128628.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Playground for Radical Concepts: Learning from the Tussengebied

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Pisano

    (Department of Architecture, University of Florence, 50100 Florence, Italy)

Abstract

The rise in the issue of the metropolitan dimension in the last decades has sparked new needs to conceptualize vast urbanized territories and develop a structured reflection on the various forms of urban–rural relationships. Urban planning in general and metropolitan planning in particular have shown difficulties in properly conceiving and interpreting these needs, which have often led urban discourse toward the use of spatial concepts. The aim of this article is thus to explore the use of spatial concepts as design instruments in the definition of urban–rural relationships in metropolitan areas. Starting from the case study of the Tussengebied (literally area-in-between) in The Netherlands and its reinterpretation developed by three eminent urbanists, the article intends to investigate, through the application of a methodology based on learning-from-expert-knowledge, how spatial concepts can support urban planning governing the urban–rural relationship by proposing a precise form of territory as well as presupposing the rules, modes of operation, and instruments of transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Pisano, 2023. "The Playground for Radical Concepts: Learning from the Tussengebied," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6958-:d:1128628
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6958/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6958/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patsy Healey, 2004. "The Treatment of Space and Place in the New Strategic Spatial Planning in Europe," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 45-67, March.
    2. Piet H. Pellenbart & Paul J.M. Van Steen, 2001. "Making space, sharing space: The new memorandum on spatial planning in the Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 92(4), pages 503-512, November.
    3. Lianne van Duinen, 2015. "New Spatial Concepts Between Innovation and Lock-in: The Case of the Dutch Deltametropolis," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 548-569, October.
    4. Kristof van Assche & Raoul Beunen & Stefan Verweij, 2020. "Comparative Planning Research, Learning, and Governance: The Benefits and Limitations of Learning Policy by Comparison," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 11-21.
    5. Claire A. Dunlop & Claudio M. Radaelli, 2013. "Systematising Policy Learning: From Monolith to Dimensions," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(3), pages 599-619, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Han, Wenjing & Zhang, Xiaoling & Zheng, Xian, 2020. "Land use regulation and urban land value: Evidence from China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Yannis Papadopoulos, 2018. "How does knowledge circulate in a regulatory network? Observing a European Platform of Regulatory Authorities meeting," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 431-450, December.
    3. Kristof Van Assche & Raoul Beunen & Stefan Verweij, 2020. "Learning from Other Places and Their Plans: Comparative Learning in and for Planning Systems," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 1-5.
    4. Melika Levelt & Leonie Janssen-Jansen, 2013. "The Amsterdam Metropolitan Area Challenge: Opportunities for Inclusive Coproduction in City-Region Governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(3), pages 540-555, June.
    5. Ekaterina Domorenok & Anthony R. Zito, 2021. "Engines of learning? Policy instruments, cities and climate governance," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 507-528, September.
    6. Van den Hoek, Duncan & Spit, Tejo & Hartmann, Thomas, 2020. "Certain flexibilities in land-use plans Towards a method for assessing flexibility," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    7. Erik Baekkeskov, 2016. "Explaining science-led policy-making: pandemic deaths, epistemic deliberation and ideational trajectories," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 395-419, December.
    8. Claire A Dunlop, 2014. "The Possible Experts: How Epistemic Communities Negotiate Barriers to Knowledge Use in Ecosystems Services Policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 208-228, April.
    9. Edwin Buitelaar & Hans Leinfelder, 2020. "Public Design of Urban Sprawl: Governments and the Extension of the Urban Fabric in Flanders and the Netherlands," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 46-57.
    10. Jean-Marie Halleux & Berit Irene Nordahl & Małgorzata Barbara Havel, 2022. "Spatial Efficiency and Socioeconomic Efficiency in Urban Land Policy and Value Capturing: Two Sides of the Same Coin?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    11. Federico Savini, 2016. "Self-Organization and Urban Development: Disaggregating the City-Region, Deconstructing Urbanity in Amsterdam," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1152-1169, November.
    12. Edwin Buitelaar & Maaike Galle & Niels Sorel, 2014. "The public planning of private planning: an analysis of controlled spontaneity in the Netherlands," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Stefano Moroni (ed.), Cities and Private Planning, chapter 12, pages 248-268, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Allan Cochrane, 2012. "Making up a Region: The Rise and Fall of the ‘South East of England’ as a Political Territory," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(1), pages 95-108, February.
    14. Karlheinz Knickel & Alexandra Almeida & Lisa Bauchinger & Maria Pia Casini & Bernd Gassler & Kerstin Hausegger-Nestelberger & Jesse Heley & Reinhard Henke & Marina Knickel & Henk Oostindie & Ulla Ovas, 2021. "Towards More Balanced Territorial Relations—The Role (and Limitations) of Spatial Planning as a Governance Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, May.
    15. Petra H Roodbol-Mekkes & Adri van den Brink, 2015. "Rescaling Spatial Planning: Spatial Planning Reforms in Denmark, England, and the Netherlands," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(1), pages 184-198, February.
    16. Louis Albrechts, 2010. "More of the Same is Not Enough! How Could Strategic Spatial Planning Be Instrumental in Dealing with the Challenges Ahead?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 37(6), pages 1115-1127, December.
    17. Andreas Novy & Daniela Coimbra Swiatek & Frank Moulaert, 2012. "Social Cohesion: A Conceptual and Political Elucidation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(9), pages 1873-1889, July.
    18. Iftikhar Lodhi, 2021. "Globalisation and public policy: bridging the disciplinary and epistemological boundaries [Which synthesis? Strategies of theoretical integration and the neorealist-neoliberal debate]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(4), pages 522-544.
    19. Toni Ahlqvist, 2014. "Building Innovation Excellence of World Class: The Cluster as an Instrument of Spatial Governance in the European Union," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 1712-1731, September.
    20. David Coen & Alexander Katsaitis, 2021. "Lobbying Brexit Negotiations: Who Lobbies Michel Barnier?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 37-47.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6958-:d:1128628. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.