From conformance to performance? A comparative analysis of the European Union territorial policy trends in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina

• Authors: Ana Peric , Sinisa Trkulja , Zora Zivanovic

Abstracts

EN

As several Western Balkans countries aspire to become members of the European Union (EU) in the (near) future, it is interesting to explore to what extent EU territorial trends are adopted in both the official national regulations and spatial planning practice. To do so, we: 1) screen EU territorial policies to elucidate the trends and principles of territorial development, 2) analyse the contents of spatial plans in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and 3) compare the practical application of the principles such as decentralisation, diffusion of power, subsidiarity, multi-actorship, synergy, transparency, citizen participation, coordinated action (among various disciplinary bodies), and holistic strategies. The findings show the ineffectiveness of declaratively adopted EU territorial trends against place-based territorial policy approaches.

Keywords

EN

territorial development; spatial planning; vertical coordination; multi-sectorial cooperation; multidisciplinary cooperation; Western Balkans

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: European Spatial Research and Policy
• Year: 2021
• Volume: 28
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 21-41

Dates

published

2021

Contributors

author

Ana Peric

• Institute for Spatial and Landscape Development, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland; Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

• https://orcid.org/0000000250293556

author

Sinisa Trkulja

• Sector for Spatial Planning and Urbanism, Ministry of Construction, Transport and Infrastructure of the Republic of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia

• https://orcid.org/0000000341247600

author

Zora Zivanovic

• Department of Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geography, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

• https://orcid.org/0000000311937416

References

• ADAMS, N., COTELLA, G. and NUNES, R. (eds.) (2011), Territorial Development, Cohesion and Spatial Planning: knowledge and policy development in an enlarged EU, 46, London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203842973
• BACHE, I. and FLINDERS, M. V. (eds.) (2004), Multi-level Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199259259.001.0001
• BELLONI, R. (2016), ‘The European Union Blowback? Euroscepticism and its Consequences in the Western Balkans’, Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 10 (4), pp. 530–547. https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2016.1211387
• BIJELIĆ, B. and ĐORĐEVIĆ, D. (2018), ‘Non-compliance of spatial plans of the highest rank in Bosnia and Herzegovina’, Collection of the Papers, LXVI-1, pp. 89–97. https://doi.org/10.5937/zrgfub1866089B
• BOJIČIĆ-DŽELILOVIĆ, V. (2011), Decentralization and Regionalization in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Issues and Challenges. Research on South East Europe, London: London School of Economics.
• BÖHME, K., ZILLMER, S., TOPTSIDOU, M. and HOLSTEIN, F. (2015), Territorial Governance and Cohesion Policy: Study, Brussels: European Parliament, Policy Department B: Structural and Cohesion Policies.
• BÖRZEL, T. A. and GRIMM, S. (2018), ‘Building Good (Enough) Governance in Postconflict Societies & Areas of Limited Statehood: The European Union & the Western Balkans’, Dædalus, 147 (1), pp. 116–127.
• CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2008), Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion: Turning Territorial Diversity into Strength, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• COTELLA, G. (2018), ‘European Spatial Integration: The Western Balkans Discontinuity’, Annual Review of Territorial Governance in Albania, I, pp. 156–166.
• COTELLA, G. (2020), ‘How Europe hits home? The impact of European Union policies on territorial governance and spatial planning’, Géocarrefour, 94 (3). https://doi.org/10.4000/geocarrefour.15648
• COTELLA, G. and BERISHA, E. (2016), ‘Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning in the Western Balkans between Transition, European Integration and Path-Dependency’, Journal of European Social Research, 2, pp. 23–51.
• CSD (Committee on Spatial Development) (1999), ESDP – European Spatial Development Perspective. Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• ČUKIĆ, I. and PERIĆ, A. (2019), ‘Transformation of the spatial planning approach in Serbia: towards strengthening the civil sector?’, [in:] SCHOLL, B., PERIĆ, A. and NIEDERMAIER, M. (eds.), Spatial and transport infrastructure development in Europe: example of the Orient/East-Med corridor, Hannover: Academy for Spatial Research and Planning (ARL), pp. 272–290.
• DŽANKIĆ, J., KEIL, S. and KMEZIĆ, M. (2019), The Europeanisation of the Western Balkans. A Failure of EU Conditionality?, Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91412-1
• EC (European Commission) (2014), Integrated sustainable urban development – Cohesion policy 2014-2020, Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• EC (European Commission) (2016), Urban agenda for EU, Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• EC (European Commission) (2020), Enlargement. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/enlarg/candidates.htm [accessed on: 20.10.2021].
• ELBASANI, A. (2013), European integration and transformation in the Western Balkans: Europe-anization or business as usual?, London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203386064
• ESPON (2013), ESPON TANGO: Territorial Approaches for New Governance, Final Report, Lux-embourg: ESPON.
• ESPON (2017), European Territorial Review. Territorial Cooperation for the Future of Europe, Luxembourg: ESPON.
• ESPON (2018), COMPASS – Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe, Final Report, Luxembourg: ESPON.
• EU MINISTERS (2007), Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities, Agreed on the Occasion of the Informal Ministerial Meeting of Ministers responsible for Urban Development, 2 May, Germany.
• EU MINISTERS (2011), Territorial Agenda of the European Union: Towards an inclusive, smart and sustainable Europe of diverse regions, Agreed on the Occasion of the Informal meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development, 19 May, Hungary.
• EU MINISTERS (2020), Territorial Agenda 2030: A future for all places, Agreed on the Occasion of the Informal meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development and/or Territorial Cohesion, 1 December, Germany.
• EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (2009), Urban Dimension of Cohesion Policy, Strasbourg: EP.
• FALUDI, A. (2000), ‘The performance of spatial planning’, Planning Practice and Research, 15 (4), pp. 299–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/713691907
• FALUDI, A. (2012), ‘Multi-Level (Territorial) Governance: Three Criticisms’, Planning Theory & Practice, 13 (2), pp. 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.677578
• FMSO (Federal Ministry of Spatial Organisation) (2013), Spatial Plan of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina 2008–2028 (draft), Sarajevo: FMSO, http://www.fmpu.gov.ba/prostorni-plan-fbih [accessed on: 01.11.2020].
• JANIN RIVOLIN, U. (2008), ‘Conforming and performing planning systems in Europe’, Planning Practice and Research, 23 (2), pp. 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697450802327081
• JUSIĆ, M. (2014), Local communes in Bosnia and Herzegovina – challenges and perspectives of institutional development (in Bosnian), Sarajevo: Analitika – Centar za društvena istraživanja.
• MARUNA, M., ČOLIĆ, R. and MILOVANOVIĆ RODIĆ, D. (2018), ‘A new regulatory framework as both an incentive and constraint to urban governance in Serbia’, [in:] BOLAY, J.-C., MARIČIĆ, T. and ZEKOVIĆ, S. (eds.), A Support to Urban Development Process, Lausanne/ Belgrade: CODEV EPFL/IAUS, pp. 80–108.
• MILETIĆ, M. (2020), ‘Why is the highway to Durres (not) cost effective for us?’, Istinomer, 4 October. https://www.istinomer.rs/analize/zasto-nam-se-ne-isplati-auto-put-do-draca/ [accessed on: 21.10.2021].
• OG RoS 15/2015 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Srpska 15/2015). Spatial Plan of the Republic of Srpska 2010-2025 – amendments.
• OG RS 13/1996 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 13/1996). Act on Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia until 2010.
• OG RS 88/2010 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 88/2010). Act on Spatial Plan of the Republic of Serbia 2010–2020.
• OG RS 145/2014 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia 145/14, 83/18, 31/19, 37/19, 9/20). Act on Planning and Construction.
• OG RS 30/2018 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia). Act on Planning System of the Republic of Serbia.
• OG RS 47/2018 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia). Act on Local Self-government Units.
• OG RS 47/2019 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia). Strategy of Sustainable Urban Development of the Republic of Serbia until 2030.
• OJ FBiH 45/2010 (Official Journal of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina 2/06, 72/07, 32/08, 4/10, 13/10, 45/10). Act on Spatial Planning and Land Use for Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• PERIĆ, A. (2019), ‘Multi-Level Governance as a Tool for Territorial Integration in Europe: Example of the Orient/East-Med Corridor’, [in:] SCHOLL, B, PERIĆ, A. and NIEDERMAIER, M. (eds.), Spatial and transport infrastructure development in Europe: example of the Orient/East-Med corridor, Hannover: Academy for Spatial Research and Planning (ARL), pp. 91–105.
• PERIĆ, A. (2020a), ‘Public engagement under authoritarian entrepreneurialism: the Belgrade Waterfront project’, Urban Research and Practice, 13 (2), pp. 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2019.1670469
• PERIĆ, A. (2020b), ‘Citizen Participation in Transitional Society: The Evolution of Participatory Planning in Serbia’, [in:] LAURIA, M. and SCHIVELY SLOTTERBACK, C. (eds.), Learning from Arnstein’s Ladder: From Citizen Participation to Public Engagement, New York: Routledge Press, pp. 91–109. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429290091-10
• PERIĆ, A. and NIEDERMAIER, M. (2019), ‘Orient/East-Med Corridor: Challenges and Potentials’, [in:] SCHOLL, B., PERIĆ, A. and NIEDERMAIER, M. (eds.), Spatial and transport infrastructure development in Europe: example of the Orient/East-Med corridor, Hannover: Academy for Spatial Research and Planning (ARL), pp. 35–70.
• PIATTONI, S. (2016), ‘Exploring European Union Macro-regional Strategies through the Lens of Multilevel Governance’, [in:] GÄNZLE, S. and KERN, K. (eds.), A ‘macro-regional’ Europe in the making: theoretical approaches and empirical evidence, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 75–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-50972-7_4
• PURKARTHOFER, E. (2019), ‘Investigating the partnership approach in the EU Urban Agenda from the perspective of soft planning’, European Planning Studies, 27 (1), pp. 86–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2018.1527294
• STEAD, D. (2012), ‘Best Practices and Policy Transfer in Spatial Planning’, Planning Practice and Research, 27 (1), pp. 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2011.644084
• STEAD, D. and COTELLA, G. (2011), ‘Differential Europe: Domestic actors and their role in shaping spatial planning systems’, disP-The Planning Review, 47 (186), pp. 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2011.10557140
• TRKULJA, S., TOŠIĆ, B. and ŽIVANOVIĆ, Z. (2012), ‘Serbian Spatial Planning among Styles of Spatial Planning in Europe’, European Planning Studies, 20 (10), pp. 1729–1746. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.713327
• VUČKOVIĆ, V. and DJORDJEVIĆ, V. (2019), Balkanizing Europeanization: Fight against Corruption and Regional Relations in the Western Balkans, Berlin: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b15731
• WATERHOUT, B. (2008), The Institutionalisation of European Spatial Planning (doctoral dissertation), Delft: Delft University Press/IOS Press.
• ZEKOVIĆ, S. and VUJOŠEVIĆ, M. (2018), ‘Land construction and urban development policy in Serbia: impact of key contextual factors’, [in:] BOLAY, J.-C., MARIČIĆ, T. and ZEKOVIĆ, S. (eds.), A Support to Urban Development Process, Lausanne/Belgrade: CODEV EPFL/IAUS, pp. 28–56.

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1231-1952.28.2.02

Biblioteka Nauki

2033932