As urban centres of agglomeration expand and compete for investment, new demands may arise for additional housing, infrastructure, and services. Failure to meet these demands imposes costs on firms and workers, stifles expansion, and potentially compromises the long-run economic competitiveness of the growth area. Drawing on evidence from Germany (Munich), Sweden (Stockholm), and the UK (Cambridge) this paper examines the organisational and political challenges of growth facilitation in the context of post-Keynesian political and economic restructuring. Particular emphasis is placed on tensions arising from changes in the form and function of European state social regulation. These tensions are not simply a matter of neoliberal regulatory deficit but reflect broader societal cleavages in relation to the uneven spatial impact of local economic growth. Deploying the concept of territorial structures of growth facilitation provides a conceptual framework for taking forward research on the relationship between state spatial regulation, state restructuring, and the competitiveness of city-regions.
AllmendingerPHaughtonG, 2012, “Post-political spatial planning in England: A crisis of consensus?”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series3789–103
2.
AmbergS, 2008, “Liberal market economy or composite regime? Institutional legacies and labor market policy in the United States”Polity40164–196
3.
AncienD, 2011, “Global city theory and the new urban politics twenty years on: The case for a geohistorical materialist approach to the (New) Urban Politics of Global Cities”Urban Studies482473–2494
4.
BaetenG, 2010, “Neoliberal planning: Does it really exist?”, in Contradictions of Neoliberal Planning Eds Tasan-KokTBaetenG, (Springer, Berlin) pp 205–211
5.
BrennerN, 1997, “State territorial restructuring and the production of spatial scale: Urban and regional planning in the Federal Republic of Germany, 1960–1990”Political Geography16273–306
6.
BrennerN, 1999, “Globalisation as reterritorialization: The rescaling of urban governance in the European Union”Urban Studies36431–451
7.
BrennerN, 2004New State Spaces, Urban Governance, and the Rescaling of Statehood (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
CernyPG, 2000, “Restructuring the political arena: Globalization and the paradoxes of the competition state”, in Globalization and Its Critics: Perspectives from Political Economy Eds RandallDGermainD, (Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants) pp 117–138
10.
CernyPGEvansM, 1999, “New Labour, globalisation and the competition state”, Harvard Papers 70, Centre for European Studies, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
11.
City of Munich, 2005Shaping the Future of Munich: Perspective Munich-Strategies, Principles, Projects Development Report 2005Department of Urban Planning and Building Regulation, City of Munich
CochraneA, 2012, “Making up a region: The rise and fall of the ‘South East of England’ as a political territory”Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy3095–108
14.
CoxKR, 1999, “The growth machine and ideologies of community”, in The Urban Growth Machine: Critical Perspective Two Decades Later Eds JonasAEGWilsonD, (State University of New York Press, Albany NY) pp 21–36
15.
CoxKRJonasAEG, 1993, “Urban development, collective consumption, and the politics of metropolitan fragmentation”Political Geography128–37
16.
CrouchC, 2005, “Models of capitalism”New Political Economy10439–456
17.
DierwechterY, 2008Urban Growth Management and its Discontents: Promises, Practices and Geopolitics in US City-regions (Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants)
FeldmanM, 1997, “Spatial structures of regulation and urban regimes”, in Reconstructing Urban Regime Theory: Regulating Urban Politics in a Global Economy Ed. LauriaM, (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) pp 30–50
21.
FougnerT, 2006, “The state, international competitiveness and neoliberal globalisation: Is there a future beyond ‘the competition state’?”Review of International Studies32165–185
22.
GCP, 2001Investing in Success: Action Plan (Greater Cambridge Partnership, Cambridge)
GrahamSMarvinS, 2001Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological Mobilities and the Urban Condition (Routledge, London)
25.
GualiniE, 2004, “Regionalization as ‘experimental regionalism’: The rescaling of territorial policy-making in Germany”International journal of Urban and Regional Research28329–353
26.
HaleC, 2010, “The mega project as crux of integrated planning: Insights from Munich's central corridor”Planning Practice and Research25587–610
27.
HallPASoskiceD, 2001, “An introduction to varieties of capitalism”, in Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage Eds HallPASoskiceD, (Oxford University Press, New York) pp 1–68
28.
HamsonJ, 2010, “Networks of connectivity, territorial fragmentation, uneven development: The new politics of city-regionalism”Political Geography2917–27
29.
HarveyDW, 1985The Limits to Capital (Blackwell, Oxford)
30.
HarveyD, 2005A Brief History of Neoliberalism (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
31.
HaughtonGMcManusP, 2012, “Neoliberal experiments with urban infrastructure: The cross city tunnel, Sydney”International journal of Urban and Regional Research3690–105
32.
HayC, 2004, “Common trajectories, variable processes, divergent outcomes? Models of European capitalism under complex economic interdependence”Review of International Political Economy11231–262
33.
HealeyP, 2007Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies (Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon)
34.
HedinKClarkELundholmEMalmbergG, 2012, “Neoliberalization of housing in Sweden: Gentrification, filtering and social polarization”Annals of the American Association of Geographers102443–463
35.
HeineltHZimmermanK, 2011, “‘How can we explain diversity in metropolitan governance within a country?’ Some reflections on recent developments in Germany”International journal or Urban and Regional Research351175–1192
36.
HermelinB, 2009, “Spatial strategic planning in the Stockholm region-discourse on the space-economy and growth factors”European Planning Studies17131–148
37.
HodsonMMarvinS, 2009, “Urban ecological security: A new urban paradigm?”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research33193–215
HudsonR, 2003, “European integration and new forms of uneven development: But not the end of territorially distinctive capitalisms in Europe”European Urban and Regional Studies1049–67
40.
JanssonJWaxellA, 2011, “Quality and regional competitiveness”Environment and Planning A432237–2252
41.
JessopB, 2002The Future of the Capitalist State (Polity Press, Cambridge)
42.
JonasAEG, 1996, “Local labour control regimes: Uneven development and the social regulation of production”Regional Studies30323–338
43.
JonasAEGWardK, 2007, “Introduction to a debate on city-regions: New geographies of governance, democracy and social reproduction”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research31169–178
44.
JonasAEGWhileAGibbsD, 2010, “Managing infrastructural and service demands in new economic spaces: The new territorial politics of collective provision”Regional Studies44183–200
45.
KeilR, 2011, “The global city comes home: Internalised globalisation in Frankfurt-am-Main”Urban Studies482495–2518
46.
KirkpatrickLOSmithMP, 2011, “The infrastructural limits to growth: Rethinking the urban growth machine intimes of fiscal crisis”International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35477–503
47.
KruegerRGibbsD, 2007, “Containing the contradictions of rapid development? New economy spaces and sustainable development”, in The Sustainable Development Paradox: Urban Political Economy in the United States and Europe Eds KruegerRGibbsD, (Guilford, New York) pp 95–122
48.
LavelleA, 2007, “Social democracy or neo-liberalism? The cases of Germany and Sweden”, in Globalising Government Business Relations Eds CurranGvon AckerE, (Pearson Longman, Frenchs Forest, NSW) pp 117–144
49.
LeibovitzJ, 2003, “Institutional barriers to associative city-region governance: The politics of institution-building and economic governance in ‘Canada's Technology Triangle’”Urban Studies402613–2642
50.
LorrainD, 2005, “Urban capitalisms: European models in competition”International Journal for Urban and Regional Research29231–267
51.
McGuirkP, 2004, “State, strategy, and scale in the competitive city: A neo Gramscian analysis of the governance of ‘global Sydney’”Environment and Planning A361019–1043
52.
MaleckiE, 2004, “Jockeying for position: What it means and why it matters to regional development policy when places compete”Regional Studies381101–1120
NewmanPThornleyA, 1996Urban Planning in Europe: International Competition, National Systems and Planning Projects (Routledge, London)
55.
ODPM, 2005Sustainable Communities: Homes for All Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (The Stationery Office, London)
56.
PA CEC, 2003The Cambridge Phenomenon: Fulfilling the PotentialPublic and Corporate Economic Consultants, Cambridge
57.
PeckJTheodoreN, 2007, “Variegated capitalism”Progress in Human Geography31731–772
58.
PeckJTickellA, 1992, “Local modes of social regulation? Regulation, Thatcherism and uneven development”Geoforum23347–363
59.
PeckJTickellA, 1995, “The social regulation of uneven development: ‘regulatory deficit’, England's South East and the collapse of Thatcherism”Environment and Planning A2715–40
RobbinsPMartinSGilbertzS, 2012, “Developing the commons: The contradictions of growth in exurban Montana”The Professional Geographer64317–331
66.
RodePNathanMvon StreitASchwingerPKippenbergGJustTSchultzT, 2010Munich Metropolitan Region: Staying Ahead on Innovation LSE Cities Next Urban Economy Series, London School of Economics
67.
RoyA, 2009, “Why India cannot plan its cities: Informality, insurgence and the idiom of urbanization”Planning Theory876–87
68.
RPV, RTK, 2003Munich–Stockholm: Comparison of the Two Regions' Planning Systems and ContentsRegional Planning Association Munich and Regional Planning and Office of Urban Transportation Stockholm County Council
69.
RTK, Office of Regional Planning and Urban Transportation Stockholm County Council 2003Regional Development Plan 2001 for the Stockholm Region abridged English version, http://www.rtk.sll.se
SanyalB, 2004, “Hybrid planning cultures: The search for the global cultural commons”, in Comparative Planning Cultures Ed. SanyalB, (Routledge, London) pp 3–28
74.
SaxenianA, 1994Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128 (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
75.
ScottAJ, 2001, “Introduction”, in Global City-regions: Trends, Theory, Policy Ed. ScottAJ, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 1–10
76.
StahreU, 2004, “City in change: Globalization, local politics and urban movements in contemporary Stockholm”International journal of Urban and Regional Research2868–85
VallerDPhelpsNAWoodAM, 2012, “Planning for growth? The implications of localism for ‘Science Vale’, Oxfordshire, UK”Town Planning Review83457–488
84.
WhileAJonasAEGGibbsD, 2004, “Unblocking the city: Growth pressures, collective provision and the search for new spaces of governance in Greater Cambridge, England”Environment and Planning A36279–304
85.
WhileAJonasAEGGibbsD, 2010, “From sustainable development to carbon control: The eco-restructuring of the state and the politics of local and regional development”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series3576–93
86.
WlodarczakD, 2012, “Smart growth and urban economic development: Connecting economic development and land-use planning using the example of high-tech firms”Environment and Planning A441255–1269
87.
WollmannH, 2004, “Local government reforms in Great Britain, Sweden, Germany and France: Between multi-function and single-purpose organisations”Local Government Studies30639–665
88.
WoodAVallerD, 2004, “Governing local and regional economies”, in Governing Local and Regional Economies: Institutions, Politics and Economic Development Eds WoodAVallerD, (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants) pp 1–21
89.
YoungDKeilR, 2010, “Reconnecting the disconnected: The politics of infrastructure in the in-between city”Cities27 (2) 87–95
