The need for a model for a new territorial dimension

On Thursday November 8th we presented number 195 of the GRIAL Magazine in which we coordinate a section dedicated to the planning of Metropolitan Areas, of which we publish here the article dedicated to urban models and the need in Galicia for greater cooperation at the supra-municipal level.

One more opportunity to extend the discussions that I have been sharing with students for the last three years in the project workshop, and that have borne fruit in the traveling exhibition “Metropolitanize. How to live between cities? and in the debate held in May in the Dialogues02.

Among the issues under discussion, we discuss the need to find a functional structure that allows the organization, management and control of urban growth in urban areas, observing alternatives to the physical and social fragmentation that causes the extension of urbanization processes. , and the need to organize urban dynamics by valuing the potential of the network of cities in the territory.

How to develop supra-municipal collaboration structures in metropolitan areas? How to manage the economic aspects of spending and investment? What skills and services could these structures assume? What guidelines should guide the future development of Galician metropolitan areas? Our article tries to answer these and other questions.

TOWARDS GREATER SUPRAMMUNICIPAL COOPERATION IN GALICIA

Elda Solloso, Toni Garcia, José A. Cachaza

The current territorial dynamics and the territorial structure inherited from the years of urban growth make the administrative organization of Galicia ineffective, and in the face of the failure of an urban model that organizes growth, they accentuate the problem of excess localism.

In Galicia there are a number of cooperation and/or supra-municipal management organizations and entities ranging from provincial councils, regional foundations, associations and consortia. The effectiveness of these as instruments to achieve more effective and coordinated regional planning varies in each case. The regional regulations also include the possibility of creating metropolitan areas as local territorial entities endowed with legal personality and autonomy[i].

Based on these regulations, in April 2012 the Vigo Metropolitan Area[ii] was created by law, the only metropolitan area legally constituted as an entity that exists in Galicia. However, its birth was not free of political controversy due to the unequal weight given to city councils in their decision-making bodies, which already threatened to hinder the normal activity of this new structure from the beginning. In the case of La Coruña, not being legally constituted, the delimitation of its metropolitan area varies according to the different definitions adopted. There is a local consortium made up of nine of the municipalities that make up its metropolitan crown, the “Consorcio das Marinas”, established in 2000 to jointly manage urban solid waste, social services and tourism. The City Council of La Coruña is not part of said consortium.

The current situation of economic crisis, public deficit and unemployment makes it relevant to reflect on the need to formulate a clear urban model for Galicia. An urban model that allows Galician town councils to maximize efficiency and optimize their resources as well as organize and cooperate at a supra-municipal level. Improving cooperation would be instrumental to more effectively exploit the assets and potential of the Galician metropolitan areas, and in their extension of the urban functional regions, as well as to better manage and/or direct their growth in less harmful areas and thus activate the resources of the rest of the territory.

In this context, urban planning and spatial planning can play a fundamental role in creating prosperity and employment. Our starting hypothesis is that the degree of cooperation between Galician city councils has ample room for improvement to achieve these objectives. Due to their important role as regional metropolises that concentrate approximately 29% of the total population, 36% of companies and bring together around 59% of the total added value of the community[iii], this hypothesis is especially applicable to the municipalities that make up the metropolitan areas. of Coruña and Vigo, even more so with a vision of the future aimed at ensuring that this cooperation culminates in the functional coordination of the urban regions Coruña-Ferrol and Vigo-Pontevedra[iv]. Furthermore, in this search for greater supra-municipal cooperation, the creation of new organizations and/or new administrative levels should not be prioritized, but rather an attempt would be made to start from the pre-existing territorial and institutional structure, and not tend to optimize it and provide it with relevant content for each case. .

Starting from the need for an urban model for Galicia that lasts over time, which is based on its Atlantic character and its explanation within the European framework, this article explores four of the oldest structures of supramunicipal cooperation established in the United States with more than forty years of operation. Based on them, it proposes ideas that can contribute to the reflection on a more effective formation of similar structures adapted to the case of Galicia, within a model in which the territory is not considered only a resource to be exploited, but the space where We build our life in community.

1. A NEW TERRITORIAL DIMENSION. THE NEED FOR A MODEL

The urban transformations in the territories that make up the metropolitan areas have an explanation in their regional scope and in their relations with other regions, while their internal dynamics today produce a fragmented landscape with functional and social discontinuities in need of a supramunicipal organization. Along with this urban structure there is a space between cities[v] that increasingly accumulates more population in the urban area and outside it covers the majority of the territory with great socioeconomic and environmental importance, although it affects an increasingly smaller population.

This is a concentrated and polarized model that we can observe in almost the entire territory of the European Union, where the urban functional regions concentrate not only the population and economic activity, but also the decision-making and research centers and the main infrastructures and equipment. linked to providing an attractive quality of life for the residence[vi].

If urban systems grew beyond the administrative limits between municipalities, and today in many cases have a transnational character, the strategies used for their management, taking into account the limitation imposed by the administrative division, involve the merger of municipalities. or the absorption/annexation of neighboring territories. These options are encountering more and more resistance, which is why it is increasingly complex to resolve the administrative fit of this new territorial dimension[vii], and the governance and management mechanisms used alternate between the use of strategic plans or management entities and, to a lesser extent, own governments measure. In this trend in the government of European metropolitan areas towards the existence of organizations oriented to coordination, management or planning, their organizational models are varied and are distributed throughout the entire power structure (local, regional, state) in (1) local governments with metropolitan powers, (2) voluntary associations of municipalities, (3) specific entities and sectoral agencies, (4) consortium entities, (5) provinces, (6) regions with metropolitan powers, or ( 7) specifically metropolitan governments created by legislative provision. In which the general trend seeks to reinforce instruments of inter-municipal cooperation based on free connection to achieve better management of common services and increase the effectiveness and quality of life of its citizens[viii].

In the Spanish legislative framework, the municipality has full jurisdiction over planning, administration and execution of urban planning, this complicated the existence of supra-municipal frameworks on territorial issues, and added to the fact that in the Autonomous Communities, territorial planning is seen more as a sectoral policy. that as a coordinating element of these policies, would make it difficult to define a territorial model at a regional and state level, and with it the lack of definition of the way in which our society relates, occupies and transforms the territory[ix]. How is it possible to define what country we want? How much are we going to lose due to the failure of a model that takes into account our potential, activates our resources and sets the guidelines to follow in the long term?

The municipalist model had the advantage of basing the construction of the urban system in the constitutional order, but from the territorial point of view it appears increasingly outdated and ineffective in the face of territorial dynamics and larger scale transformations. Supramunicipal territorial planning is needed, the territory needs to be thought about and decided on in its entirety.

In May 2006, the “Manifesto for a new culture of the territory” [x] called on public powers and society as a whole in favor of the containment and control of land uses in a situation in which Economic growth translated into environmental deterioration and disorder and dilapidation of territory, a finite and primordial resource. Now, in a very different economic situation, of crisis and recession, concern for the good governance of the territory is even more urgent. This is how the text “territory, urbanism and crisis” begins, which expands the meaning of the manifesto.

If we recognize in the territory a non-renewable asset, an economic asset with ecological, cultural and heritage values that should not be reduced to the price of land. In the current context, a change in the productive model is demanded, which puts an end to the reasons that led to the current situation of expansive urbanism, which had no other objective than to create only to urbanize, and promote the development of supramunicipal regulatory instruments for the benefit of general interests, incorporating the objectives of environmental, economic and social sustainability.

2. SUPRAMUNICIPAL COOPERATION STRUCTURES: PRECEDENTS

This section is supported by the work of the Institute outside International Urban Development (IIUD), a non-profit organization with which we collaborate and which promotes sustainable urban development. IIUD [xi] documented different models of supralocal cooperation in European and American metropolitan areas. For this article we focus on four consolidated cooperation models in the United States, specifically: (1) a Regional Plan Association in the New York region; (2) the Metropolitan Area Planning Council in Boston; (3) the Denver Regional Council of Governments in Denver; and (4) the Metropolitan Council of Minneapolis/Saint Paul. In addition to its long history, its interest lies in the fact that all of them were articulated on the basis of existing competencies and therefore did not involve the creation of new administrative levels, which seemed relevant to us to contribute to the reflection on the Galician case. .

It should be emphasized that these models are not presented as perfect or as ideals to follow. The large number of interests, often conflicting, that are at stake make municipal government a complex issue in which there are no panaceas and where solutions have to be tailored to each case. The difference in the context between Galicia, Spain and the United States highlights this need even more. Despite these limitations, the models that we are going to analyze have been active for at least four decades, and also contributed to greater inter-municipal coordination and therefore to a certain pacification of localist interests. Our intention is therefore to take them as case studies that serve to illustrate some of the factors that can contribute to a more operational functioning of the supramunicipal coordination and/or management structures in metropolitan areas.

2.1 Regional Plan Association (RPA).

Guy. The RPA is a private, non-profit organization that operates in the New York metropolitan area known as the “Tri-State Area” since it includes municipalities belonging to the states of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. It should be noted that in the US, unlike municipalities and counties, metropolitan areas do not constitute administrative levels in themselves. They are geographic areas defined by the census office at the federal level for the collection of data for statistical purposes.

Area it encompasses. Created in 1922, the RPA encompasses municipalities belonging to 31 counties within the three states and a population of around 20 million inhabitants.

Mission. The RPA acts as a “think-tank”. Its mission consists mainly of the study, documentation and mobilization of various sectors related to the development and competitiveness of the region, as well as the development of regional plans that serve as a guide to the municipalities of the three states in the design of their policies. long-term urban development. The last of these regional plans, “A Region at Risk”, dates from 1996 and is still in force. He also leads infrastructure issues at the national level (“America 2050”), sustainability, and competitiveness. In addition, the RPA provides specific technical assistance to municipalities in the application and implementation of the regional plan.

A common point to the four structures that we will see in this article is that they tend to take a more comprehensive approach to the disciplines of territorial planning, urban planning and economic development. For example, a primary objective of RPA's mission is to maintain the competitiveness of the Tri-State region. But in addition to economic development, R&D&I and infrastructure, RPA also links competitiveness to the sustainable development of the region understood as the existence of an effective public transportation network, the control of the “sprawl” (suburban expansion), the conservation of its ecological system of permanently protected spaces (proposed by the RPA in 1929 and which served as an example for other metropolitan areas[xii]), and the improvement of the quality of life in terms of access to housing, the consolidation of employment rates and supply of higher quality public and urban spaces. In a globalized economy, the presence of all these elements contributes to a metropolitan region meeting the conditions that make it attractive not only to companies, but also to people and investors, all of them essential factors for competitiveness.

Government and management. Members of the RPA are a broad sector of metropolitan area businesses, as well as numerous philanthropic groups, civic associations and interest groups. It is governed by a board of directors made up of members of these groups and its administration and the development of its mission and activities are carried out by a team of specialized professionals. Given its composition, the RPA's plans and recommendations seek public-private alliances and promote the role of civil society, and involve extensive consultation work with municipalities. This, together with its technical legitimacy and its recognized independence when it comes to ensuring the interests of the region, favored the adhesion of the municipalities even when the recommendations and plans of the RPA are not binding.

Budget. The annual budget for the development of RPA activities is around 4.2 million dollars, and is financed by its members, by grants and by donations. The tax advantages available to donations from companies and individuals in the US are undoubtedly a key factor in sustaining the extensive philanthropic activity in that country. [xiii]

2.2 Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC).

Guy. MAPC is a publicly owned organization established by the State Government of Massachusetts in 1963. It operates in the Greater Boston region.

Area it encompasses. It covers 101 municipalities, an area of 3,680 km2 and a population of around 3.06 million inhabitants.

Mission. The MAPC acts as a “think-tank”. It was born with the mission of providing a common information base to municipalities and documenting regional development trends in the Greater Boston area. Over time, its mission was extended to also include the development of regional plans that ensure the promotion of “smart growth” in the region. Or “smart growth”, literally “intelligent growth”, is a current theory in the Anglo-Saxon plan that emerged as a reaction to the traditional urban growth and mobility model based on suburban expansion, low density, heavily dependent on the private car and very intensive. energetically. In contrast to this model, “smart growth” advocates the promotion of denser and more compact urban growth, where expansion is controlled through the promotion of mixed land uses, the coordination of urban development and the transportation system. public, the prioritization of mobility on foot and the creation of a more pedestrian-oriented urban space.

The main products of the MAPC are sector studies and GIS (geographic information systems) cartography of the region. Like its mission, its areas of work evolved from issues of regional transportation infrastructure in the beginning, to issues related to the conservation of rural soil and natural resources, access to housing, education, economic development and public health today.

In addition to its studies and excellent cartographic work, MAPC developed the Metro Future 2030 plan, a plan that provides a long-term regional strategic vision as well as recommendations and short-term action plans for the promotion of “smart growth” in municipalities. that make up the Greater Boston area.

Government and management. The MAPC governing board is made up of 101 representatives, one from each participating local entity, as well as members appointed by the State of Massachusetts and designated staff from state agencies. The development of its activities is carried out by MAPC's own personnel. Similar to the RPA, its planning work is anchored in processes of extensive consultation with municipalities and sectoral actors with an emphasis on citizen participation. MAPC also provides technical assistance to municipalities in their own projects as well as in the implementation of the Metro Future 2030 regional plan at the local level.

Budget. MAPC's annual budget for its activities is $2.8 million and is funded by federal, state and local governments, as well as private donations. [xiv]

2.3 Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG).

Guy. DRCOG is a voluntary association of municipalities in the form of a non-profit organization that operates in the Denver (Colorado) metropolitan area.

Area it encompasses. It is made up of 47 municipalities and 9 counties and has a population of approximately 2.6 million inhabitants.

Mission. DRCOG was founded in 1968 although its origins date back to 1955. Its mission is to promote joint municipal work to address the main challenges facing the metropolitan area. These have varied throughout its history, and include the efficient management of urban growth within a metropolitan area with a great environmental and ecological heritage; improving traffic and mobility; planning to anticipate future needs and providing better services to older people.

Similar to previous organizations, DRCOG conducts studies and generates aggregate data for the entire metropolitan area and documents its urban trends. DRCOG also carries out planning work and developed the regional plan “Metro Vision 2035” (previously “Metro Vision 2020”). Its main recommendations focus on the following areas: (1) establishment of legal limits to urban expansion on previously non-urban land (“urban growth boundaries”) and incentives for directing this in areas with less impact; (2) development of a multimodal metropolitan transportation system coordinated with urban growth; (3) development of sub-centers to reduce the number of center-periphery trips; (4) actions to improve and monitor water and air quality.

Its success and the perception of its benefits encouraged DRCOG to take another step in its degree of cooperation. O “Mile-High Compact (2000) involved the signing of binding and voluntary contracts by which a majority of municipalities committed to the counties to approve plans that go beyond the strictly urban planning and integrate several sectors, as well as to approve regulations that contribute to the implementation of the Metro Vision 2035 plan. Through these contracts, prior studies were carried out to evaluate the best situations for large-scale developments, as well as coordinate the implementation of the Water Plan within the area. metropolitan.

Government and management. DRCOG is governed by a board of directors that includes one democratic representative from each of the 57 participating governments, regardless of their size or whether they are rural or urban. As it is both a municipality and a county, Denver brings together two representatives. Additionally, the governor appoints three board members who do not have voting power. While the preparation of technical studies is carried out by its team of professionals, the Metro Vision plan is prepared by a working group made up of councilors and members of the private sector and environmental groups. Like RPA and MAPC, DRCOG also provides specific technical support to municipalities through its own staff.

Budget. DRCOG finances its activity through membership fees paid by its member municipalities, as well as contributions from the federal and state governments. [xv]

2.4 Minneapolis/Saint Paul Metropolitan Council (MSPMC).

Guy. The MSPMC is a metropolitan planning entity established by Minnesota State law in 1967 and operating in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area, also known as the “Twin Cities.” It is the first entity of its kind to be created in the United States.

Area it encompasses. It covers around 186 municipalities, 7 counties and a population of approximately 2.85 million people.

Mission. The MSPMC represents a further step in the degree of cooperation since it assumes some typically municipal powers. These include the management of sanitation and water purification for the entire metropolitan area, the management of the metropolitan bus and train transportation system, the coordination of the park system, and the promotion of public housing.

In addition, the MSPMC also prepared the “2030 Regional Framework” plan, which establishes the framework for urban growth and long-term development within the metropolitan area and includes recommendations for municipalities in terms of urban planning, land use, territorial planning, transportation, airport infrastructure, water, waste treatment and natural spaces.

The degree of intermunicipal cooperation in the Minneapolis-St. Paul is increased by a Minnesota state law called the “Fiscal Disparities Act” of 1971. This law requires municipalities to annually calculate the assessed value of all commercial and industrial properties located within their jurisdiction and to contribute to a fund the 40% of the increase with respect to its 1971 values. The collection is in turn redistributed among all the municipalities of the metropolitan area on the basis of an index that calculates the “relative fiscal capacity” of each of them. [xvi]

According to the IIUD, this system, the only one of its kind that exists in the US, contributed to reducing competition between municipalities to attract economic development to their jurisdictions, to restructuring land use patterns and to encouraging investment in depressed areas. of the area. It seems clear that municipalities can find incentives to form a common front and attract economic development to their metropolitan area, since regardless of its location, the existing mechanisms ensure that all of them will benefit. According to the MSPMC, the system could also have contributed to municipalities rejecting development proposals that could have harmful long-term effects, as well as rationalizing the subsidies that administrations give to attract development to certain areas to the detriment of others. Some studies indicate that the current tax disparity between municipalities of more than 10,000 inhabitants in the Minneapolis / St. Paul metropolitan area is 3 to 1, but that in the absence of the Fiscal Parity Law it would be 10 to 1. [xvii]

Government and management. The governing body of the MSPMC has 17 members, 1 representative for each of the 16 geographic districts that make up the metropolitan area plus 1 president. We are appointed by the state governor after a parliamentary vote. The total team of MSPMC is around 3,700 employees.

Budget. The MSPMC budget is 519 million dollars (2010). It is financed in several ways: (1) with own revenues from sanitation taxes and public transportation revenues; (2) through state and federal grants; and (3) through an overload on the property tax rate applied in the seven counties that make up the metropolitan area. [xviii]

2.5 Key points of supramunicipal cooperation structures

By way of conclusion, in this section we will proceed to identify a series of factors that we consider were key to the consolidation and development of the activity of the supramunicipal cooperation structures that we present.

Trust and alliances. This more comprehensive and more professional approach to planning and management contributed to designing more effective urban policies and services and, in turn, to generating greater trust in supra-municipal structures. In addition to the willingness to dialogue, trust is essential to achieve a more productive collaborative relationship with the private sector and with groups of citizens and civil society, which are great assets that a city has. Involving these actors more significantly in urban planning processes usually results in improving the investment climate and citizen attractiveness, which are key factors for the competitiveness of a region.

Perception of tangible benefits. Given the numerous interests that coexist in local politics, with some exceptions, open cooperation is usually not the natural attitude that municipalities adopt in their relationship with neighboring jurisdictions. Faced with this mistrust, the factors that we identify in this section contributed to the municipalities tangibly perceiving the benefits of the association over the competition. This generated greater trust and promoted more transparency in access to information and decision-making, which strengthened cooperation structures. Indirectly, these factors also contributed to calming some of the localist and electoral interests that in many cases undermined the success of supra-municipal projects.

Municipal representation. In at least two of the three public-type cases that we analyzed, Boston and Denver, the representation of the municipalities on the governing board of the supra-municipal structures is similar for all regardless of the size of the municipality. This does not prevent representatives of regional and supra-municipal governments (counties), regional public agencies, and other representatives from participating in the board and/or assembly, with or without the right to vote depending on the case.

Flexibility. The structures presented enjoyed a certain flexibility in the definition of the regions where they operate, as well as in the structuring of their powers and areas of action, which were articulated gradually to respond to the changing challenges of each moment.

“Bottom-up” approach. Some state governments, and beginning in 1960 the US federal government, favored the creation of supra-municipal planning structures through the provision of funding for “Councils of Governments” at the regional level that carried out plan and land-use planning studies. as well as collaborative projects. Although the support of higher administrative levels was and is necessary for its formation and continuity over time, in the structures presented, the municipalities play an active and committed role in the supramunicipal project.

3. TOWARDS GREATER SUPRAMUNICIPAL COOPERATION IN GALICIA

This section proposes a series of ideas that we consider could contribute to a more operational functioning of the supramunicipal cooperation and/or management structures in Galicia. Although we try to take a general approach and not make any type of distinction by city size, these considerations are of special relevance for Galician metropolitan areas.

The main messages we will try to convey are that: (1) the cooperation structures that are created should not constitute in practice a new intermediate administrative level but rather should be complementary to the activities of the municipalities, or, where appropriate, replace some of them. are; (2) to consolidate your activity, it is necessary to adopt a gradual or progressive approach and build on your own experience and the achievements that are achieved; (3) a dose of altruism and farsightedness is also needed on the part of municipal leaders to renounce some short-term policies in favor of the common good of their urban region.

It would also be advisable for the Regional Government and the Provincial Councils to provide better incentives and support for the creation of cooperation structures that carry out concrete and measurable activities of rationalization and pooling of supra-municipal resources, as well as a greater willingness to eliminate overlaps between administrations than always. threaten to limit management effectiveness.

In a generic way, the following sequential approach of the competencies and activities to be developed by the supramunicipal cooperation structures is proposed:

Professionalized management and continuity. It is important that the personnel regime of the structures considers the possibility of hiring specialized personnel who can carry out management that is as professional and multidisciplinary as possible. In order for them to have continuity in their mission, it is necessary that the entities have guaranteed a stable and predictable annual budget.

Collection of data, carrying out studies and investment plans on various topics, in consultation with companies and civic associations, on which to prepare diagnoses, identifying weaknesses and potentialities as well as formulating possible lines of action for the municipalities. The frequency of this type of activities should be annual and led by specialized personnel.

Pilot initiatives. The rapid implementation of successful initiatives would contribute to injecting, from the beginning, dynamism into the activity of cooperation structures. That is why it is recommended to launch immediate pilot initiatives in those municipalities that present greater leadership and in projects that meet a certain consensus, and therefore with greater possibilities of success.

Preparation of supramunicipal guides and recommendations. To the extent of their possibilities and their geographical scope, cooperation structures should be provided with documents that provide a vision and medium-term objectives, as well as specific guides and recommendations to the municipalities that comprise them. The legislation already grants metropolitan areas the function of carrying out Metropolitan Plans in accordance with the guidelines proposed by the Ministry that holds local government powers. Along these lines, we should highlight the importance of these documents being comprehensive and participatory, that is, that they include spatial, economic, social and environmental guidelines and carry out significant consultations with the municipalities, but also with the private sector, associations and civil society. Likewise, to contribute to the promotion of competitiveness, Metropolitan Plans need to be strategic in nature and position the urban regions of Coruña-Ferrol and Vigo-Pontevedra first internally, second in relation to each other, and third within the context. of the Galicia-Northern Portugal Euro-Region.

Technical assistance to municipalities. Part of the mission of the cooperation structures should also be to provide specific technical assistance to municipalities both in the implementation of supra-municipal recommendations at the local level and in other specific municipal projects.

Voluntary signing of agreements/contracts. The transfer of municipal powers in favor of supra-municipal cooperation structures should adopt a gradual and voluntary approach. We consider it operational to begin by promoting the signing of contracts for the implementation of specific activities included in the supra-municipal directive documents, on a voluntary basis but whose subscription is binding for the municipalities. This would contribute to generating a cooperation experience and learning on which to establish the foundations towards a greater degree of integration of competencies in the future.

Provision of own financial resources. In the medium term, it would be important for supra-municipal cooperation structures to contribute at least partially to self-financing through instruments such as the transfer of part of local taxes, rate modulation or supra-municipal funds. Along these lines, and similarly to the case of Minneapolis/St. Paul, we find the mechanisms for capturing and redistributing part of the tax increase for economic activities among municipalities on the basis of fiscal dynamism indices very interesting. The possible benefits of these instruments, including the reduction of competition between neighboring jurisdictions to attract economic development and the rationalization of land uses, mainly industrial, would make it very interesting to explore options along these lines.

Integration of competencies. In the medium and long term, and building on the successes previously achieved, it could be considered moving towards the integration of the management of municipal powers in favor of cooperation structures in a series of areas:

to. Urban planning and planning, mainly the General Municipal Planning Plans and interurban transportation.

b. Competitiveness and economic development, including major projects, European programmes, tourism, education and training programs and innovation.

c. Management and protection of the environment and the natural and cultural landscape

d. Services that can be optimized through economies of scale, such as water supply, garbage collection, and firefighters.

Bibliographic notes

[i] Local Administration Law of Galicia Law 5/1997 of July 22[ii] Law 4/2012 of April 12, of it Vigo Metropolitan Area

[iii] Fernando González Laxe, “The revitalization of metropolitan areas in economic development: the Galician singularity”, GRIAL magazine article nº195, 2012.

[iv] Various and imprecise terms such as “city-region”, “Aire métropolitaine”, “Metropolregion”, etc., are used in Europe to define metropolitan areas, which experts narrowed down into two with the intention of reaching a common definition: “Morphological urban sand” (MUA) and “Functional urban sand” (FUA); The first expresses spatial continuity and the second the polynuclear, plurifunctional and autonomous character that a metropolitan area acquires when it is surpassed by the extension of its radius of action and the incorporation of other centers. In this article we use “metropolitan area” and “urban area” when talking about the relationships around a single central city council, such as Coruña or Vigo, and we define as “urban functional region” or “urban region” a larger area such as Coruña. Ferrol, or Vigo-Pontevedra, as can be seen in the images in the book by Dalda, JL, G. Docampo, M., G. Harguindey, J., “Diffused city in Galicia”. Ed. Junta de Galicia 2005.

[V] The term “between-cities” was used by Thomas Sieverts in his book “Entre-ville, une lecture de la Zwischenstadt”. Ed. Parenthèses 2004. Here we collect his idea of paying attention to the suburban territory that today serves as the residence of the majority of the metropolitan population, a “city” had gone from the city, without planning, where local and regional economies do intermingle. .[Yo][ii]

[iii][vii] Today in Europe, experts and professionals support greater integration of governance and management at the local and regional level to guarantee greater effectiveness in its development and competitiveness. Several case studies at the European level on the importance of metropolitan areas and their government can be seen in the article “Joining Forces. Metropolitan governance & competitiveness of European cities. URBACT European program for sustainable urban development 2012, www.urbact.eu

[vi] To define “territorial models” we need to delimit the functional areas of territorial dynamics; The definition of the limit is quite imprecise in border areas but not the content of the activities that make metropolitan areas and urban regions unique productive areas in their territory, as defined by Antonio Serrano Rodríguez in the article “The European territorial model. Trends for the 21st century and their implications for the Spanish territorial model”, URBAN magazine nº8. http://www.aq.upm.es/Departamentos/Urbanismo/publicaciones/urban1.html

[viii] An analysis of the structure and form of government of the European Urban Arenas will be presented in the article prepared by the Servei d ´ Studies Territorials of the Mancomunitat de Municicipis de E ´ Metropolitan Area of Barcelona “European metropolitan agglomerations” published in no. 50 of the magazine Papers 2009. http://www.iermb.uab.es/htm/revistaPapers_numeros.asp

[ix] The rapid transformation of the Spanish urban system towards demographic decentralization and urban activities, its supramunicipal dimension, management made difficult by administrative fragmentation and physical redesign, the incompatibility between metropolitan and local strategic plans, and the difficulty of financing of central cities for the provision of services and infrastructure to neighboring municipalities are discussed in the article by Oriol Nello “Large Spanish cities: urban dynamics and incidences of state policies” in º 27 magazine Papers 1997, http:// oriolnello.blogspot.com.es/p/articles.html; and delving further into the influence of accessibility and mobility in the processes of extension of urbanization in the book “The Metropolitan City in Spain: Urban processes at the beginning of the 21st century.” Ed. Aranzadi 2010.

[x] “Manifesto for a new culture of the territory.” College of Geographers and the Association of Spanish Geographers 2006, http://nuevaculturadelterritorio.wordpress.com/acerca-de/

[xi] Institute outside International Urban Development www.i2ud.org

[xii] Vigier, F., Driscoll, J., Lee-Chuvala, C., “Ad hoc regionalism: Managing growth through spatial planning – Learning from the American experience”, in Journal of Cross Border Studies of Ireland, in. 1, Spring 2006

[xiii] More information about RPA activities on the website: www.rpa.org[xiv]More information about MAPC activities on the website: www.mapc.org

[xv] More information about DRGC activities on the website: www.drcog.org

[xvi] Vigier, F., Driscoll, J., Lee-Chuvala, C., “Ad hoc regionalism: Managing growth through spatial planning – Learning from the American experience”, in Journal of Cross Border Studies of Ireland, in the. 1, Spring 2006

[xvii] Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Council “Fiscal disparities law seen in the big asset outside Twin Cities arena,” Newsletter, October 2012: http://www.metrocouncil.org/newsletter/planning2010/FiscalDisparitiesOct4.htm

[xviii] More information about the activities of the MSPMC on the website: www.metrocouncil.org

Antonio Garcia Fernandez, Metropolitan area, City, Elda Solloso, Barrie Foundation, Galicia, Jose A. Cachaza, Metropolitanize, GRAIL magazine, Tony Garcia, town planning, urbanization