Course outline – ADM 487
“Regional policy and governance”
(2006-2007 Fall Semester)
Mustafa Kemal Bayýrbað
Room Number: A-318
Telephone: 2103018
e-mail: bayirbag@metu.edu.tr
Schedule:
Monday
Office hours: By appointment
I - Course Objective
The aim of this course is to introduce you to the literature on regional policy and governance and to equip you with analytical tools necessary to understand the changing spatiality of public policies and administration in Turkey. Throughout the course, the international examples, and especially the case of the European Union countries will be discussed. The objective of these discussions is to help you grasp the dynamics that (will) influence and shape the path of the public administration system and the policy process in Turkey on the way to integration with the EU. The course will finally cover the recent developments in Turkey in light of these discussions.
II - Teaching Policy
A friendly and positive teaching environment is preferred. I would like to promote an atmosphere of mutual trust and vivid intellectual engagement. Cheating is not welcome and in no way accepted. Please try your best to add to the class with your own intellectual capacity. If you need any extra equipment or measure that will facilitate and ease your learning process, please let me know in advance. If you have health problems that will not let you attend the class or any exam, please contact me as soon as possible. Please also note that I personally donot sympathise with giving extensions or make-ups unless there is a very good excuse.
III- Student Responsibilities and the Marking Scheme
The course will help you operationalise the above mentioned insights by asking you to write two short mid-term reflection papers that will review the literature, and to prepare a final report on a topic related to the Turkish case that you will choose upon consulting with the instructor. Your active contributions to the classroom discussions, and thus the attendence, is crucial! Students are expected to come to the class prepared, meaning that you will have read the assigned materials to be able to follow the lectures and discussions. You are encouraged to participate in the class discussions.
And, here are the assignment details:
a) Participation -
% 25
Attendance, preparedness to the classroom discussions, the quality of your engagement
b) Reflection
Paper I – % 15
- Details to be explained in the classroom
- Covers Weeks 2-6
- Submitted during the class of week 8
c) Reflection
Paper II - %15
- Details to be explained in the classroom
- Covers Weeks 7-12
- Submitted during the class of week 14
d) Final Paper - %
45
- Details to be explained in the classroom
- Focuses on the Turkish case
- Submitted in the final date as announced by the president’s office
IV - Examination and Presentation Evaluation Policy:
(the average of three evaluation criteria)
a) Knowledge of the Literature (out of 4): Breadth and Scope of your discussion. Allusion to reading materials, proper citations from the authors.
b) Insight or In Depth Analysis (out of 4): Awareness of main issues, tensions, concepts, and efficiency in their operationalisation.
c) Engagement (out of 4): Well researched / presented, good examples, innovative thinking and original contributions.
Note: METU marking scale will be used as the term grades are calculated (no curve method).
V - Topics and Readings
WEEK 1: (Sept 25)
Introduction
WEEK 2: (Oct 2)
Changing spatiality of state action and public policies
This section aims to discuss the increasing significance of “regional policy” by discussing the recent spatial turn in public policy studies.
Key words:
(hollowing out?)
(spatiality of the state)
(the question of sectoral policies vs territorial policies)
Must Readings
1) Ventriss, Curtis (1994) “Public Administration and the changing nature of space”,
American Review of Public Administration, 24 (1).
2) Peck, Jamie (2001) “Neoliberalizing states: thin policies/hard outcomes”, Progress in Human Geography 25 (3): 445–455.
3) Jessop, Bob (2002) “Time and Space in the Globalization of Capital and Their Implications for State Power”, Rethinking Marxism 14 (1): 97-117
Suggested Readings
4) Brenner, Neil (2004) New State Spaces, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5) Weiss, Linda (1990) The myth of the powerless state. (section to be announced)
6) Häkli, Jouni (2001) “In the territory of knowledge: state-centred discourses and the construction of society”, Progress in Human Geography 25 (3): 403–422.
7) Anderson, J. J. (1992) The Territorial Imperative, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
WEEKS 3-4: (Oct 9, Oct 16)
Regional policies: from “focus of public policies” to “locus of public policy-making” – contradictions and tensions
This section emphasises the emergence of regions as “policy-makers”, and discusses this transition by alluding to the coventional emphasis on regions as subjects of state intervention and as policy-instruments.
Key words:
(Regional governance)
(Regional politics)
(State intervention)
Must Readings
W3
1) Brenner, Neil (1999) “Beyond state-centrism? Space, territoriality, and geographical scale in globalization studies”, Theory and Society 28: 39-78.
2) Rhodes, R.A.W. (1994) “The hollowing-out of the state: the changing nature of the public service in Britain”, The political quarterly: 138-151.
3) Stone, Clarence N. (2005) “Rethinking the policy-politics connection”, Policy Studies, 26 (3/4): 241 – 260.
W4
4) Clark, T. A. (1982) “The Role of the State in Regional Development” in R. Flowerdew (ed.) Institutions and Geographical Patterns, London: Croom Helm, 169 – 208.
5) Le Gales, Patrick (1998) “Conclusion – government and governance of regions: structural weaknesses and new mobilisations” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge, 239-267.
6) Space, scale and state strategy:
rethinking urban and regional governance
Gordon MacLeod and Mark Goodwin
Progress in Human Geography 23,4 (1999) pp. 503–527
Suggested Readings
7) Hajer, Maarten (2003) “Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void”,
Policy Sciences 36: 175-195.
8) Ansell, C.K et al (1997) “Dual Networks in
European Regional Development Policy”, Journal of Common Market Studies 35 (3).
9) Ohmae. K. (1995) The End of the Nation State: The Rise of Regional Economies, The Free Press.
WEEKS 5-6: (Oct 30, Nov 6)
The new order and structures
of policy-making and “regional policies”
This section focuses on the new structures and forms of governance. It pays attention to the emerging need for new forms of coordination in the broader process of restructuring of government and governance: Regions, as the new sites of coordination.
Key words:
(coordination)
(re-scaling)
(multi-level governance)
Must Readings
W5
1) Putnam, R.
(1993) Making Democracy Work, Civic traditions in
modern Italy, Princeton: Princeton U.P.
2) Ansell, Chriss (2000) “The networked polity: Regional Development in Western Europe”, Governance, 13 (3): 303-333.
3) Benz, Arthur (1998) “German regions in the European Union: from joint policy making to multi-level governance” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge, 111-130.
W6
4) Jones, M. and G. MacLeod (2004) “Regional spaces, spaces of regionalism: territory, insurgent politics and the English question”, Trans Inst Br Geogr, (29): 433–452.
5) Braczyk, H-J and M.Heidenreich (?) “Regional governance structures in a globalized world”: 414 - 440
6) MacLeod, G. (2001) “New regionalism reconsidered: globalisation and the remaking of political economic space”, IJURR, 25 (4): 804-829.
Suggested Readings
7) Perkmann, M. and N-L Sum “Globalization, Regionalization and Cross-Border
Regions: Scales, Discourses and Governance”
8) Evans, M. and J. Davies (1999) “Understanding Policy Transfer: a multi-level, multi-disciplinary perspective”, Public Administration, 77 (2): 361-385.
9) Soja, E. (1985) "Regions in context: spatiality, periodicity, and the historical geography of the regional question", Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 3: 175 - 190.
WEEKS 7-8: (Nov 13, Nov 20)
The agency of
regions: Regions as policy/polity-makers
This section explores the political process behind the formation of regions as policy-makers, i.e, as agents with explicit political, economic and social agendas.
Key words:
(agency)
(business interests, elites)
(collective action)
Must Readings
W7
1) Smouts, M-C (1998) “The region as the new imagined community?” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge, 30-38.
2) Hirst, P. (1993) “Associational Democracy” in D. Held (ed.) Prospects for Democracy, Stanford, California: Stanford University Press: 112-135.
3) Bradford, N. (1998) "Prospects for Associative Governance: Lessons From Ontario" Politics and Society, 26 (4)
W8
4) Ritaine, E. (1998) “The political capacity of southern European Regions” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge, 67-88.
5) Coleman, William D. and Henry J. Jacek (1989) “Capitalists, Collective Action and Regionalism: an introduction” in W. D. Coleman and H. J. Jacek (eds), Regionalism, Business Interests and Public Policy, London: SAGE, 1 – 12.
6) Eising, R. (?) “Multi-Level Governance and Business Interests in the European Union”, Governance, 17 (2): 211-245.
7) Genieys, W. (1998) “Autonomous communities and the state in Spain: the role of intermediary elites” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge,166-180.
Suggested Readings
8) Þengül, H. T. (1999) “Siyaset ve mekansal olcek sorunu: Yerelci Stratejilerin bir elestirisi” in A. Tonak (ed.) Küreselleþme: Emperyalizm, Yerellik ve Ýþçi Sýnýfý, Ankara: Imge.
9) Humphrey, L. and K. Shaw (2004) “Regional devolution and democratic renewal: developing a radical approach to stakeholder involvement in the English regions”, Environment and Planning A, 36: 2183 – 2202.
11) Streeck, W. (1989) “The Territorial Organization of Interests and the Logics of Associative Action: the case of Handwerk organization in West Germany”, in William
D. Coleman and Henry J. Jacek (eds), Regionalism, Business Interests and Public Policy, London: SAGE, 59 - 94
12) Lovering, J. 1999. “Theory led by policy: the inadequacies of ‘the New Regionalism’ (ilustrated in the case of Wales)”, IJURR, 23: 379-395.
WEEKS 9-10: (Nov 20, Nov 27)
The EU experience:
regional policies, regional policy-making and the question of
political-economic context
This section aims to flesh out the insights elaborated so far, by paying attention to the EU case. It focuses on the role of regions and regional policy in the broader agenda of the EU. The contextual differences of the member countries offer fruitful insights about the nature or emerging regionalism.
Key words:
(the EU)
(case studies)
Must Readings
W9
1) Keating, M. (1998) “Is there a regional level of government in Europe?” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge: 11-29.
2) Benz, A. and B. Eberlein (1999) “The Europeanization of regional policies: patterns of multi-level governance”, Journal of European Public Policy 6 (2): 1350–1763.
3) Bachtler, J. Et al (2003) “Regional policies after 2006: Complementarity or conflict?”, European Policy Research Paper Number 51 (September 2003), European Policies Research Centre University of Strathclyde.
W10
4) Brenner, N. (2000) “Building ‘Euro-Regions’: Locational Politics and the political geography of Neoliberalism in Post-Unification Germany”, European Urban and Regional Studies, 7(4).
5) Deas, I. and B. Giordano (?) “Regions, city-regions, identity and institution building: Contemporary experiences of the scalar turn in Italy and England”, Journal of Urban Affairs, 25 (2): 225–246.
6) Keating, M. (1988) “Does Regional Government Work? The experience of Italy, France and Spain”, Governance, 1(2): 184-204.
Suggested Readings
7) Hardy, S. et al (1995) An Enlarged Europe: Regions in Competition?, Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
8) Balme, R. (1998) “The French Regions as a Space for Public Policy” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge,181 – 198.
9) Bagnasco, Arnaldo and Marco Oberti (1998) “Italy: ‘le trompe-l’oeil’ of regions” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge,150-165.
10) Conzelmann, Thomas (1998) “ ‘Europeanisation’ of Regional Development Policies? Linking the Multi-Level Governance Approach with Theories of Policy Learning and Policy Change”, European Integration online Papers (EIoP), 2 (4) (http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1998-004a.htm)
WEEKS 11-12: (Dec 4, Dec 11)
Regional policy
objectives and cross-policy issues
This section concentrates on the content of regional policies, and pays close attention to the issues of economic development and social cohesion, as two major – and intertwined - concerns.
Key Words:
(Social cohesion)
(Economic development)
Must Readings
W11: Regional
policy and the question of social cohesion
1) Rodriguez-Pose, A.S and U. Fratesi (2004) “Between Development and Social Policies: The Impact of European Structural Funds in Objective 1 Regions”, Regional Studies, 38 (1): 97–113.
2) Geddes, M. (2000) “Tackling Social Exclusion in the European Union? The Limits to the New Orthodoxy of Local Partnership”, I.J.U.R.R, 24 (4): 782-800.
3) Kearns,
A. and R. Forrest (2000) “Social
Cohesion and Multilevel Urban Governance”
Urban
Studies, 37 (5-6): 995–1017.
W12: Regional
policy and the question of economic development
4) Wolfe, D. (1997) “The emergence of the Region State” in T. J. Courchene (ed.) The Nation State in a Global/Information Era: Policy Challenges, John Deutsch Institute for the Study of Economic Policy: Queen’s U., Kingston: 205-240
5) Dunford, M. (1998) “Regions and Economic Development” in P. LeGales and C. Lequesne (eds) Regions in Europe, London and New York: Routledge, 89-110.
6) Lawton-Smith, H. et al (2001) “Competitiveness and European regional policy: A review and analysis” (Draft), Department of Geography Working Papers, Oxford University.
7) Jones, M. and G. MacLeod (1999) “Towards a regional renaissance? Reconfiguring and rescaling England’s economic governance”, Trans Inst Br Geogr, 24: 295–313.
Suggested Readings
8) Amin, A. (1998) “An institutionalist perspective on regional economic development”, Paper presented at the Economic Geography Research Group Seminar ‘Institutions and Governance’, July 3 1998, Department of Geography UCL, London.
9) MacLeod, G. (2001) “New regionalism reconsidered: globalisation and the remaking of political economic space”, IJURR, 25 (4): 804-829.
10) Storper, M. (1999) "The Resurgence of Regional Economics" in T.J. Barnes and M. S. Gertler (eds) The New Industrial Geography: regions, regulation and institutions, London and NY: Routledge: 23-53.
11) Amin, A. And N. Thrift (1999) "Institutional Issues for the European Regions" in T.J. Barnes and M. S. Gertler (eds) The New Industrial Geography: regions, regulation and institutions, London and NY: Routledge: 292 - 314.
12) Lagendijk, A. and J. Cornford (2000) “Regional institutions and knowledge-tracking new forms of regional development policy”, Geoforum, 31: 209-218.
13) Hansen, N. (1996) “Regional Development Policies: Past Problems and Future Possibilities”, Canadian Journal of Regional Science, 19 (1)
14) Martin, P. (2002), “Public policies and economic geography” Philippe Martin, CERAS-ENPC and CEPR, September 2002, Université Paris-1 Panthéon Sorbonne.
15) Martin, P. (2000) “The Role of Public Policy in the Process of Regional Convergence”, CERAS-ENPC Paris and CEPR, January 2000, Prepared for the Conference on “Regional Development Policy and Convergence in the EU” European Investment Bank, Forthcoming EIB Papers.
16) Puga, D. (2002) “European regional policies in light of recent location theories”, Journal of economic geography, (2): 373-406.
WEEKS 13-14: (Dec 18, Dec 25)
The Turkish Case
This section covers the Turkish case. The temporal focus is 1990s-2000s, and the empirical focus is the recent –planned- changes in the institutional structure of regional policy-making, and the main concerns of different social groups re: these policy changes.
Key words:
Regional development agencies
Interest groups
Legal framework
Must Readings
W13
1) Eraydýn, A. (2002) Yeni Sanayi Odaklari: Yerel Kalkinmanin Yeniden Kavramlastirilmasi, Ankara: ODTU Mimarlýk Fakültesi.
2) Eraydýn, A. (2004) “Sosyal Sistemin Fiziki Mekandaki Organizasyonu’ndan Bölgesel Adanmýþlýk Kuramý’na”, Deðiþen-Dönüþen Kent ve Bölge, cilt 1, 8 Kasým Dünya Þehircilik Günü 28. Kolokyumu: 93-116.
3) ATAAY, F. (2001) “Turkiye Kapitalizminin Mekansal Dönüþümü”, Praksis, 1 (2) (Bahar 2001), 53 – 96.
4) Bayramoðlu, S. (2005) “Türkiye’de Bölgesel Politikalarýn Geliþimi”, Menaf Turan (der.) Bölge Kalkýnma Ajanslarý: Nedir, Ne deðildir? Ýçinde, 35-120, Ankara: Paragraf.
W14
5) Hughes, J.T. (1998) “The role development agencies in regional policy: An academic and practitioner approach”, Urban Studies, 35 (4): 615-626.
6) Turan, M. (2005) “Bölgesel Kalkýnma Programlarý”, Menaf Turan (der.) Bölge Kalkýnma Ajanslarý: Nedir, Ne deðildir? Ýçinde, 159-180, Ankara: Paragraf.
7) Kendir, H. (2005) “Tüsiad ve Bölge Politikalarý”, Menaf Turan (der.) Bölge Kalkýnma Ajanslarý: Nedir, Ne deðildir? Ýçinde, 281-288, Ankara: Paragraf.
8) Gündoðdu, Ý. (2006), "Chapter IV: Politics of Scale in the Turkish State Space:The Case of Regional Development Agencies" in Rescaling of Social Relations Towards Subnational Regional Space: An Investigation of Turkish Case, Unpublished Master Thesis, ODTU SBE, Ankara: 62-95.
8) Ýl Özel Ýdaresi
Kanunlarý
9) Bölgesel Kalkýnma
Ajansý Kanunu
10) Kamu Yönetiminin
Temel Ýlkeleri ve Yeniden Yapýlandýrýlmasý Kanunu
NOTE: Extra (suggested) reading materials will be announced in the classroom.