This paper investigates the first ever so-called ‘macroregional strategy’ developed under the aegis of the European Commission: the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR). Through a drawing together of elements of actor-network theory and regionalization theory, it is argued that the adoption of the EUSBSR can be seen as a milestone within a wider process towards Baltic Sea regionalization, whereby the Baltic Sea region is increasingly ‘solidified’ through the positioning of the European Commission as a spokesperson for the interests of the region. It is further suggested that, if not seriously contested, the possible acceptance of the European Commission as a designated regional spokesperson might be a crucial step in a process whereby the soft space of the Baltic Sea Region may gradually become more formalized. Nonetheless, caution must be taken so as not to confuse degrees of formal institutional fixity with degrees of durability.
AllmendingerPHaughtonG, 2009, “Soft spaces, fuzzy boundaries, and metagovernance: The new spatial planning in the Thames Gateway”Environment and Planning A41617–633.
2.
AllmendingerPHaughtonG, 2010, “Spatial planning, devolution, and new planning spaces”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy28803–818.
3.
BinghamN TThriftN, 2000, “Some new instructions for travellers: The geography of Bruno Latour and Michel Serres”, in Thinking Space Eds CrangM TThriftN (Routledge, London) pp 281–301.
4.
BusekEGjoreskaA, 2010, “The Danube Region: Transformation and emergence”Eastern Journal of European Studies1 (1) 9–20.
5.
CallonM, 1986, “Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay”, in Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? Ed. LawJ (Routledge, London) pp 196–223.
6.
CallonMLatourB, 1981, “Unscrewing the big Leviathan: How actors macrostructure reality and how sociologists help them to do so”, in Advances in Social Theory and Methodology: Toward an Integration of Micro- and Macro-sociologies Eds Knorr-CetinKCicourelA V (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London) pp 277–303.
7.
CEC, Commission of the European Communities (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg) 1999ESDP—European Spatial Development Perspective.
8.
CEC, Commission of the European Communities (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg) 2007Territorial Agenda of the European Union: Towards a More Competitive and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions Inforegio site, http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/cooperation/index_en.htm.
9.
CEC, Commission of the European Communities (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg) 2009aEuropean Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2009)248 Final, http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/cooperation/baltic/index_en.htm.
CoorenF, 2010Action and Agency in Dialogue (John Benjamins, Amsterdam).
16.
DeasILordA, 2006, “From a new regionalism to an unusual regionalism? The emergence of non-standard regional spaces and lessons for the territorial reorganisation of the state”Urban Studies431847–1877.
17.
DonaldsonA, 2006, “Performing regions: Territorial development and cultural politics in a Europe of the Regions”Environment and Planning A382075–2092.
18.
DuboisAHedinSSchmittPSterlingJ, 2009, “EU macro-regions and macro-regional strategies—a scoping study”, Nordregio WP 2009/4, Nordregio, Stockholm, http://www.nordregio.se/?vis=artikkel&fid=5699.
19.
DührSColombCNadinV, 2010European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation (Routledge, London).
20.
DutkowskiMGörmarWPalmowskiT, 2009, “Foundations for the development of the Baltic Sea Region and its spatial structures”Informationen zur Raumentwicklung8/9515–522.
21.
FaludiA, 2010, “Centenary paper: European spatial planning: Past, present and future”Town Planning Review811–22.
22.
FaludiAWaterhoutB, 2002The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective: No Masterplan (Routledge, London).
23.
GiddensA, 1984The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Polity Press, Cambridge).
24.
GörmarW, 2009, “Der Beitrag transnationaler Kooperationsprojekte zur Entwicklung der Ostseeregion”Informationen zur Raumentwicklung8/9629–640.
25.
HarveyD, 1996Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference (Blackwell, Oxford).
26.
HaughtonGAllmendingerPCounsellDVigarG, 2010The New Spatial Planning: Territorial Management with Soft Spaces and Fuzzy Boundaries (Routledge, London).
27.
HealeyP, 2007Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies: Towards a Relational Planning for Our Times (Routledge, London).
28.
HealeyP, 2008, “Making choices that matter: The practical art of situated strategic judgement in spatial strategy-making”, in Empowering the Planning Fields: Ethics, Creativity and Action Eds van den BroeckJMoulaertFOosterlynckS (Acco, Leuven) pp 23–41.
29.
HillierJ, 2007Stretching Beyond the Horizon: A Multiplanar Theory of Spatial Planning and Governance (Ashgate, Burlington, VT).
30.
JensenO BRichardsonT, 2004Making European Space: Mobility, Power and Territorial Identity (Routledge, London).
31.
JessopB, 2004, “Multi-level governance and multi-level metagovernance changes in the European Union as integral moments in the transformation and reorientation of contemporary statehood”, in Multi-level Governance Eds BacheIFlindersM (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 49–74.
32.
JoenniemiP, 1993, “Regionalization in the Baltic Sea Area: Actors and policies”, in Cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region Ed. JoenniemiP (Taylor and Francis, New York) pp 161–178.
JonesMMacLeodG, 2004, “Regional spaces, spaces of regionalism: Territory, insurgent politics and the English question”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series29433–452.
35.
LagendijkA, 2005, “Regions and regional boundaries in the minds and practices of policy-makers across Europe”, in Borders and Economic Behaviour in Europe: A Geographical Approach Eds Van VilsterenGWeverE (Van Gorcum, Assen) pp 116–137.
36.
LatourB, 1987Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
LatourB, 1999Pandora's Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
39.
LatourB, 2004Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).
40.
LatourB, 2005Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-network-theory (Oxford University Press, Oxford).
41.
LawJ, 1986, “On the methods of long distance control: Vessels, navigation, and the Portuguese route to India”, in Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge? Sociological Review Monograph 32, Ed. LawJ (Routledge and Kegan Paul, London) pp 234–263.
42.
LawJ, 1992, “Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and heterogeneity”Systems Practice5379–393.
LehtiM, 2009, “Baltic Region in becoming: From the Council of the Baltic Sea States to the EU's strategy for the Baltic Sea Area”Lithuanian Foreign Policy Review number 22, 9–27.
48.
LöwendahlBPursianenC, 2009, “Multilateral cooperation and spatial development”Informationen zur Raumentwicklung8/9613–620.
49.
MacLeodGJonesM, 2001, “Renewing the geography of regions”Environment and Planning D: Society and Space19669–695.
50.
MetzgerJ, 2011, “Neither revolution, nor resignation: (re)democratizing contemporary planning practice, a commentary on Allmendinger and Haughton's ‘Spatial planning, devolution, and new planning practices’”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy29191–196.
MolA, 1999, “Ontological politics: A word and some questions”, in Actor Network Theory: And After Eds LawJHassardJ (Blackwell, Oxford) pp 74–89.
53.
MolALawJ, 1994, “Regions, networks and fluids: Anaemia and social topology”Social Studies of Science24641–671.
54.
MurdochJ, 1998, “The spaces of actor-network theory”Geoforum29357–374.
55.
MurdochJ, 2006Post-structuralist Geography: A Guide to Relational Space (Sage, London).
56.
PaasiA, 1986, “The institutionalisation of regions: A theoretical framework for understanding the emergence of regions and the constitution of regional identity”Fennia—International Journal of Geography164 (1) 105–146.
57.
PaasiA, 2002a, “Place and region: Regional worlds and words”Progress in Human Geography26802–811.
58.
PaasiA, 2002b, “Bounded spaces in the mobile world: Deconstructing ‘regional identity’”Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie93137–148.
59.
PaasiA2010, “Regions are social constructs, but who or what ‘constructs’ them? Agency in question”Environment and Planning A422296–2301.
60.
PainterJ, 2008, “Cartographic anxiety and the search for regionality”Environment and Planning A40342–361.
SchmittP, 2009, “Raumpolitische Diskurse um Metropolregionen in Deutschland—Positionen, Kontroversen, Perspektiven”, in Metropolregionen—Innovation, Wettbewerb, Handlungsfähigkeit Eds KnielingJMaternA (German Academy for Spatial Research, Hanover) pp 60–100.
64.
SteadD, 2011, “European macro-regional strategies: Indications of spatial rescaling?”Planning Theory and Practice12163–167.
65.
SterlingJ, 2008, “The Baltic Sea Region organisations”Journal of Nordregio130–32.
66.
StrathernM, 2004Partial Connections (AltaMira, Walnut Creek, CA).
67.
De TardeG, 2012 [1895] Monadology and Sociology (re.press, Prahran).
68.
ThriftN, 1996Spatial Formations (Sage, London).
69.
ThriftN, 1999, “The place of complexity”Theory, Culture and Society16 (3) 31–69.
