Politecnico di Torino (logo)

The Europeanization of spatial planning in germany

Bogdan Rugina

The Europeanization of spatial planning in germany.

Rel. Umberto Janin Rivolin Yoccoz, Giancarlo Cotella. Politecnico di Torino, Corso di laurea magistrale in Pianificazione Territoriale, Urbanistica E Paesaggistico-Ambientale, 2015


Since the half of the previous century, the process of European Integration has progressively gained relevance. The participation of a growing number of Member States to the European Union (EU) supranational policy constitutes a unique process in the world, where different national entities cooperate and compete at the same time towards the achievement of common as well as individual goal. As various authors clearly illustrates, this process have evident consequences for spatial planning (among others: Bôhme & Waterhout, 2008, Adams et al. 2011; Stead & Cotella, 2011). In particular, while spatial planning in the Member States is subject to the influence of norms and actions developed at the EU level, the attempt at to influence the European territorial agenda at the same time, in a circular process that is often referred to as Europeanization (Radaelli, 2004).

Bearing this in mind, the present thesis, build on the knowledge consolidated during my Master Studies in Territorial, Urban, Environmental and Landscape Planning, and in particular during the module Politiche urbane e territoriali in Italia e in Europa (headed by prof. U. Janin Rivolin), aims to explore the process of Europeanization of spatial planning in Germany. More in detail, the analysis builds on a conceptual framework developed by Cotella & Janin Rivolin to identify the “channels” that, on the one hand, contribute to direct the influence of the EU over the Member States’ spatial planning system and, on the other hand, allows the Member States to affect the development of those concepts, initiatives and actions that often goes under the label “European Spatial Planning” (Faludi, 2001; Janin Rivolin, 2004; Dühr et al. 2010).

The main objective of this thesis is to identify the possible evidence of Europeanization as changes in the national institutions related to spatial planning in the Federal Republic of Germany, by means of analytical methods observing the changes taking place. At the same time, the attitude of German Actors and institutions towards the territorial dimension of EU policy is also a matter of analysis, to speculate over their actual influence over the development of European spatial planning.

In support of the research for this thesis, I had the opportunity to perform an internship at the HafenCity University (Hamburg, Germany) in the Academic Year 2013/2014 (April to August), where I’ve been involved in the European Project INTERREG IV, URMA (Urban-rural cooperation in Metropolitan areas). Afterwards, aiming at collecting further material, I conducted a second period of research at the HafenCity University (October and November), looking for literature and interviews useful for the purpose of the thesis.

The volume is structured in six chapters. After this introduction, a second chapter presents the context of the thesis, focusing on the concept of spatial planning system, on the various families and idealtypes of planning system that characterize the EU Member States as well as on the territorial dimension of the EU policies. Then, the theoretical framework adopted by the research work is structured, together with the followed methodology, Chapter 4 focuses on the spatial planning system on the Federal Republic of Germany, and presents it according to the four main dimensions identified in the theoretical framework: structure, tools, discourse and practices. On the basis of the presented information, chapter 5 reflects over the Europeanization of spatial planning in the German case, on the one hand presenting the evidence of influence of the EU over the German spatial planning system and, on the other hand, reflecting over the influence of Germany over the European spatial planning. A last chapter closes the contribution, presenting the conclusions of the research in terms of intensity and trends of the various top-down, bottom-up channels of influence explored.

When looking at the Europeanization of spatial planning in the German case, the are no doubt that the influences between EU and Germany in spatial planning are taking place, here a possible interpretation is related to the “co-evolution” of ideas, discourses, beliefs and expectations.

Relators: Umberto Janin Rivolin Yoccoz, Giancarlo Cotella
Publication type: Printed
Subjects: A Architettura > AO Design
U Urbanistica > UG Pianificazione del paesaggio
Corso di laurea: Corso di laurea magistrale in Pianificazione Territoriale, Urbanistica E Paesaggistico-Ambientale
Classe di laurea: UNSPECIFIED
Aziende collaboratrici: UNSPECIFIED
URI: http://webthesis.biblio.polito.it/id/eprint/4104



List of Figures

List of Tables

1. Introduction

2. Spatial planning in Europe and European spatial planning. Setting the context

2.1 Spatial Planning systems in Europe

2.1.1 Classifications: Legal Families, Ideal types, traditions and cultures

2.1.2 Spatial planning systems as institutional technologies

2.1.3 Conforming and Performing Models

2.2 The European Union and the spatial policies

3. Analysing the Europeanization of spatial planning. Theory and Methodology

3.1 Spatial planning systems ’process of change

3.2 The institutional cycle of EU territorial governance

3.3 Europeanization of spatial planning. Top-down, bottom-up “channels” of influence

3.4 Methodological approach

4. Spatial planning system in Germany

4.1 Structure: The system of territorial governance

4.1.1 Planning tradition and culture

4.1.2 Levels of spatial planning Bund (Federal) level Länder (State) level Regional Level Local level

4.2 Tools: Between tradition and innovation

4.2.1 Bund (Federal) spatial planning tools

4.2.2 Länder planning tools

4.2.3 Regional planning tools

4.2.4 Local government planning tools

4.3 Discourse: Spatial planning guidelines and policies

4.3.1 Changes and challenges, Unification and Integration

4.3.2 Concepts and Strategies for Spatial Development in Germany 2006 Growth and innovation Ensuring services of public interest Conservation of resources, shaping of cultural landscapes

4.3.3 Further development of the Concepts and Strategies for Spatial Development in Germany 2013

4.4 Practice: German planning system in practice

4.4.1 The Hamburg Metropolitan Region

4.4.2 Planning in Hanseatic Hamburg

4.4.3 Development perspectives

4.4.4 Introduction to the “URMA Project — The cooperation along the Jutland Corridor”

5. Europeanization of the German spatial planning system?

5.1 Influence of European spatial planning on the German spatial planning system

5.1.1 Structural influence

5.1.2 Instrumental influence

5.1.3 Top-down dialogic influence

5.2 Influence of German spatial planning system on European spatial planning

5.2.1 Dialogic bottom-up influence

5.2.2 Practical and horizontal influence

6. Conclusions

6.1 Intensity and trends in the Europeanization of spatial planning in Germany

6.2 Spatial planning in Germany and Italy

6.3 Considerations

Sommario Italiano






- Adams, Neil, Giancarlo Cotella, and Richard Nunes, eds. “Territorial Development, Cohesion and Spatial Planning: Knowledge and Policy Development in an Enlarged EU”. Vol. 46. Routledge, 2011.

- BBR (Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung) (ed.) (2005): „Raumordnungsbericht“ 2005, Bonn.

- Benz, Arthur, and Burkard Eberlein. "The Europeanization of regional policies: patterns of multilevel governance." Journal of European Public Policy 6.2 (1999): 329-348.

- Benz, Arthur. "How to reduce the burden of coordination in European spatial planning." European Spatial Planning (2002): 139-155.

- Blotevogel, H. H. „Die Metropolregionen in der Raumordnungspolitik Deutschlands —ein neues strategisches Raumbild?“ In: Geographica Helvetica, no. 3, (2001): 57-168.

- Blotevogel, H.H., Danielzyk, R. and Münter, A. “Spatial Planning in Germany: Institutional Inertia and new Challenges”. In ARL - Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.). Spatial Planning Systems and Practices in Europe. A comparative Perspective on Continuity and Changes New York: Routledge (2014): 83-107.

- BMVBS (Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Affairs), (ed.). “Concepts and Strategies for Spatial Development in Germany”. Adopted by the Standing Conference of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning, Bonn, June 30th 2006.

- Bodemann, U. “HafenCity Hamburg — Anlass, Masterplan, Chancen”. In Schubert, D. (Hrsg.): Hafen- und Uferzonen im Wandel (2007).

- Böhme, Kai, and Peter Schön. "From Leipzig to Leipzig: Territorial research delivers evidence for the new Territorial Agenda of the European Union." disP-The Planning Review 42.165 (2006): 61-70.

- Böhme, K.; Waterhout, B. “The Europeanization of Planning”, in Faludi A. (Ed.) European Spatial Research and Planning. Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, (2008): 225-248.

- Börzel, Tanja A. “Pace Setting, Foot-Dragging and Fence-Sitting, Member States Responses to Europeanization”. No. p0013. Queens University Belfast, (2002).

- Börzel, Tanja A. "Towards convergence in Europe? Institutional adaptation to Europeanization in Germany and Spain." JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 37.4 (1999): 573-596.

- Börzel, Tanja A., and Thomas Risse. "Conceptualizing the domestic impact of Europe. " The politics of Europeanization (2003): 57-80.

- Breckner, Ingrid, and Marcus Menzl. "Neighbourliness in the City Centre: Reality and Potential in the Case of the Hamburg HafenCity." New Urbanism: Life, Work, and Space in the New Downtown (2012): 133.

- Bremm, Heinz-Juergen. "German Unification, European Integration and the Breakdown of Communism: Spatial Development Trends in a Unified Germany and Post-Communist Eastern Europe." Built Environment (1993): 40-49.

- Bulmer, Simon J., and Claudio M. Radaelli. “The Europeanisation of National Policy?” No. p0042. Queens University Belfast, (2004).

- Bundesministerium für Raumordnung; Bauwesen und Städtebau (BMBau)(ed.) Raumordnungspolitischer Handlungsrahmen“, Bonn, (1995).

- Bundesregierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (ed.). „Perspektiven für Deutschland:Unsere Strategie für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung“. Berlin: Bundesregierung, (2002).

- Burns, John, and Robert W. Scapens. "Conceptualizing management accounting change: an institutional framework." Management accounting research 11.1 (2000): 3-25.

- Carpenter, Juliet. "Addressing Europe's urban challenges: lessons from the EU URBAN Community Initiative." Urban Studies 43.12 (2006): 2145-2162.

- CEC — Commission of the European Communities. “The EU Compendium of Spatial Planning Systems and Policies, Regional Development Studies, 28”. Luxembourg: European Communities, (1997).

- CEC — Commission of the European Communities. “The EU Compendium of Spatial Planning Systems and Policies: Germany, Regional Development Studies, 28 F”, Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, (1999).

- Cotella, Giancarlo (2009) “Governance territoriale comunitaria e sistemi di pianificazione: Riflessioni sull’allargamento ad est dell’Unione europea”, PhD. thesis in Spatial Planning and Local Development, Politecnico di Torino, (Discussed in May 2009).

- Cotella, Giancarlo, and U. Janin Rivolin. "Institutions, discourse and practices: towards a multidimensional understanding of EU territorial governance." AESOP-Association of European Schools of Planning, (2010): 1-31.

- Cotella, Giancarlo, and U. Janin Rivolin. “Europeanization of Spatial Planning through Discourse and Practice in Italy”, disP, 186(3), (2011): 42-53.

- Cotella, Giancarlo; Janin Rivolin, Umberto; Reimer, Mario. “Structure, Tools, Discourses and Practices: A Multidimensional Comparative Approach to EU Territorial Governance.” In: The University of Western Australia (Hrsg.): Proceedings of the World Planning Schools Congress 2011 “Planning's Future — Futures Planning: Planning in an Era of Global (UN) Certainty and Transformation”, Perth, (2011).

- Danielzyk, R. And Knieling, J. “Informelle Planungsansatze“. In ARL — Akademie fur Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.) Grindriss der Raumordnung und Raumentwicklung. Hannover, ARL, (2011): 473-298.

- David, Carl-Heinz: „Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen“, in: Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.): Grundriß der Landes- und Regionalplanung. Hannover (1999): 82-91.

- Davies, H. W. E. "Towards a European planning system?" Planning Practice and Research 9.1 (1994): 63-69.

- Davoudi, S. “Territorial Cohesion, European social model and spatial policy research”, in Faludi A. (Ed) Territorial cohesion and European model of society. Cambridge MA: Lincoln Institute for Land Policy, (2007): 81-104.

- Dühr, Stefanie, Dominic Stead, and Wil Zonneveld. "The Europeanization of spatial planning through territorial cooperation." Planning, Practice & Research 22.3 (2007): 291-307.

- Dühr, S.; Colomb, C.; Nadin, V. European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation. London and New York: Routledge, (2010).

- EC — European Commission. “Completing the Internal Market: White Paper of The Commission for the European Council”, COM (85) 310. Brussels, June (1985).

- EEC - No. 4253/88 to 4256/88, of 19 December 1988 (OJ L374/31, 31 December 1988).

- ESPON — “European Spatial Planning Observation Network, Governance of territorial and urban policies from EU to local level, ESPON Project 2.3.2”, Final report, (2007).

- Faludi, Andreas. "The performance of spatial planning." Planning practice and Research 15.4 (2000): 299-318.

- Faludi, Andreas. "Positioning European spatial planning." European Planning Studies 10.7 (2002): 897-909.

- Faludi, Andreas. "Spatial planning traditions in Europe: their role in the ESDP process 1." International Planning Studies 9.2-3 (2004): 155-172.

- Faludi, Andreas. "Making sense of the Territorial Agenda of the European Union." European Journal of Spatial Development 25 (2007): 1-21.

- Faludi, Andreas, and Bas Waterhout. “The making of the European Spatial Development Perspective: no masterplan”. Vol. 2. Psychology Press, 2002.

- Faludi, Andreas. "Centenary paper: European spatial planning: past, present and future." Town Planning Review 81.1 (2010): 1-22.

- Faludi, Andreas. "Planning for States and Nation/States: A TransAtlantic Exploration - The Europeanization of Planning and the Role of ESPON." (2012).

- Frank Othegrafen, Approaches and Attributes of the Planning Culture in Germany - Introduction for the project start up “CULTPLAN”, Wageningen (NL), April 15/16th — 2005.

- Friedmann, J. “The World City Hypothesis; in: Development and Change”, no.17, (1986): 69-84.

- Gestel, Ton van, and Andreas Faludi. "Towards a European Territoral Cohesion Assessment Network: A bright future for ESPON?" Town Planning Review 76.1 (2005): 81-92.

- Getimis, P. “Comparing Spatial Planning Systems and Planning Cultures in Europe. The Need for a Muld-scalar Approach”. Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), (2012): 25-40.

- Giannakourou, G. “Transforming Spatial Planning Policy in Mediterranean Countries: Europeanization and Domestic Change”, European Planning Studies, 13 (2), (2005): 319-331.

- Gielen, Demetrio Munoz, and Tuna Tasan-Kok. "Flexibility in Planning and the Consequences for Public-value Capturing in UK, Spain and the Netherlands." European Planning Studies 18.7 (2010): 1097-1131.

- Goppel, K. „Landesplannung“. In ARL - Akademie fur Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.) Grundriss der Raumordnung und Raumentwicklung Hannover: ARL, (2005): 435-450.

- Gualini, Enrico. "Planning and the Intelligence of Institutions." Interactive approaches to territorial policy-making between institutional design and institution building. Aldershot (2001).

- Gualini, Enrico . “Regionalization as Experimental Regionalism: The Rescaling of Territorial policymaking in Germany”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(2), (2004): 329-353.

- Hix, Simon, and Bjorn H0yland. “The political system of the European Union.” London: Macmillan, 1999.

- Hooghe, Liesbet, and Gary Marks. “Multi-level governance and European integration.” Rowman & Littlefield, 2001.

- Huebner, M., and C. Stellfeldt-Koch. "Impacts and Benefits of Transnational Projects (INTERREG IIIB)." (2009).

- Janin Rivolin, Umberto. “European Spatial Planning”. Milano: Franco Angeli, (2004).

- Janin Rivolin, Umberto. “Conforming and performing planning systems in Europe: an unbearable cohabitation, Planning Practice and Research, 23(2), (2008): 167-186.

- Janin Rivolin, Umberto. "EU territorial governance: learning from institutional progress." European Journal of Spatial Development 38 (2010): 1-28.

- Janin Rivolin, Umberto. "Planning systems as institutional technologies: a proposed conceptualization and the implications for comparison." Planning Practice and Research 27.1 (2012): 63-85.

- Johnson, Corey M. "Cross-border regions and territorial restructuring in central Europe room for more transboundary SPACE." European Urban and Regional Studies 16.2 (2009): 177-191.

- Jurczek, Peter. "European Metropolitan Regions in Germany: a new spatial planning strategy in Europe." Kommunal-und regionalwissenschaftliche Arbeiten on; line (2008).

- Kaika, Maria. "The Water Framework Directive: a new directive for a changing social, political and economic European framework." European Planning Studies 11.3 (2003): 299-316.

- Knieling, Jörg, and Frank Othengrafen, eds. “Planning cultures in Europe: decoding cultural phenomena in urban and regional planning.” Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2009.

- Knieling, Jörg . "Metropolitan networking in the Western Baltic Sea. Region: Metropolitan Region of Hamburg between multilevel governance and soft spatial development." Role of Regions (2011): 195-213.

- Knill, Christoph. "The EU’s Impact on Domestic Policies: Perspectives for Future Research." Efficient and Democratic Governance in the European Union (2008).

- Knill, Christoph, and Dirk Lehmkuhl. "How Europe Matters. Different Mechanisms of Europeanization." European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 3.7 (1999).

- Kohler-Koch, Beate. "European networks and ideas: changing national policies?" European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 6 (2002): 6.

- Krautzberger in: Ernst, Werner/ Zinkahn, Willy/ Bielenberg, Walter/ Krautzberger, Michael et. al.: BauGB — Baugesetzbuch Kommentar“, status March, 2006.

- Krautzberger, Michael, and Bernhard Stuer. "Das neue Raumordnungsgesetz des Bundes." Baurecht 40.2 (2009): 180.

- Kujath, H. J. „Deutsche Metropolregionen als Knoten in europäischen Netzwerken“; in: Geographische Rundschau, no. 3, (2005): 20-26.

- Kunzmann, Klaus R. "State planning: a German success story?" International Planning Studies 6.2 (2001): 153-166.

- Kunzmann, Klaus R. “Spatial Development and territorial cohesion in Europe”, in U. Altrock, S. Guntner, S. Hunig and D. Peters (eds) Spatial Planning and Urban Development in the New EU Member States: Form Adjustment to Reinvention, Aldershot: Ashgate, (2006).

- Larsson, G. “Spatial Planning Systems in Western Europe: An Overview.” Amsterdam: IOS Press, (2006).

- Lenschow, A. “Europeanisation of public policy”, in Richardson, J. (ed.), European Union - Power and Policy Making, 3rd ed., Abingdon: Routledge, (2006): 55-71.

- Maier, K. (2012): “Europeanization and Changing Planning in East-Central Europe: An Easterner’s View”, Planning Practice and Research, 27 (1): 137-154.

- Manzella, Gian Paolo, and Carlos Mendez. "The turning points of EU Cohesion policy." Prepared for the Independent report by Barca F., An agenda for a reformed Cohesion Policy. Also available at: URL: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/policy/future/pdf/8_manzella_final-formatted.pdf (2009).

- Martin, Reiner. "The Impact of the EU’s Structural and Cohesion Funds on Real Convergence in the EU." NBP Conference, Potential Output and Barriers to Growth, Yalesie Gome. 2003.

- Mazza, L. "Appunti sul disegno di un sistema di pianificazione." CRU—Critica della razionalità urbanistica 14.1 (2003): 51-66.

- Mendez, Carlos, John Bachtler, and Ms Fiona Wishlade. “EU Cohesion Policy and European Integration: The Dynamics of EU Budget and Regional Policy Reform.” Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2014.

- Mertins, G. & M. Paal. “Regional Planning within the German Institutional Planning Framework -Instruments and Effectiveness.” - In: Investigación & Desarrollo 17/2, (2009): 242-267.

- Ministerkonferenz für Raumordnung. "Leitbilder und Handlungsstrategien für die Raumentwicklung in Deutschland." Beschluss vom 30 Juni 2006.

- Moroni, S. An evolutionary theory of institutions and a dynamic approach to reform, Planning Theory, 9(4), (2010): 275-297.

- MUDTCEU — Ministers of Urban Development and Territorial Cohesion of the European Union. “Territorial State and Perspective of the European Union: Toward a Stronger European Territorial

- Cohesion in the Light of the Lisbon and Gothenburg Ambitions,” Based on the Scoping Document discussed by Ministers at their Informal Ministerial Meeting in Luxembourg in May 2005, A Background Document for the Territorial Agenda of the European Union, (2007).

- Müller, Bernhard: „Regionalpläne“, in: Grundriß der Landes- und Regionalplanung, Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.), Hannover 1999.

- Munoz Gielen, D., Tasan-Kok, T. „Flexibility in Planning and the Consequences for Public-value Capturing in UK, Spain and the Netherlands.” European Planning Studies, 18(7), (2010): 1097-1131.

- Nadin, Vincent, and Dominic Stead. "European spatial planning systems, social models and learning." disP-The Planning Review 44.172 (2008): 35-47.

- Neill Nugent. “The government and politics of the European Union.” Duke University Press, 2003.

- Newman, Peter, and Andy Thornley. “Urban planning in Europe: international competition, national systems, and planning projects.” Psychology Press, 1996.

- Nord, Statistikamt. "Nettostromerzeugung 2008." Kiel. Internetseite Statistisches Amt für Hamburg und Schleswig-Holstein: http://www. statistik-nord. de/uploads/tx_standocuments/SI10_023.pdf. Stand 2 (2010): 2010.

- North, D. C. “Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (1990).

- Olsen, Johan P. "The many faces of Europeanization." JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 40.5 (2002): 921-952.

- Othengrafen, Frank. “Uncovering the unconscious dimensions of planning: using culture as a tool to analyze spatial planning practices.” Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2012.

- Pahl-Weber, E., & Henckel, D. “The planning system and planning terms in Germany: A glossary” (No. 7). Studies in Spatial Development, (2008).

- Potluka, Oto. “Impact of EU Cohesion Policy in Central Europe” (Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag), 2010.

- Radaelli, Claudio M. "Whither Europeanization? Concept stretching and substantive change." (2000).

- Reimer, M., Blotevogel, H. H. “Comparing Spatial Planning Practice in Europe: A Plea for Cultural Sensitization.” Planning Practice and Research, 27(1), (2012): 7-24.

- Rivolin, Umberto Janin, and Andreas Faludi. "The hidden face of European spatial planning: Innovations in governance." European Planning Studies 13.2 (2005): 195-215.

- Sager, Tore. "Responsibilities of theorists: The case of communicative planning theory." Progress in Planning 72.1 (2009): 1-51.

- Sanchez-Salgado, R. and Woll, C. “L’europeanisation et les acteurs non-e'tatiques,” in: B. Palier, Y. Surel, et al. (2007), L’Europe en action. L’europe'anisation dans une perspective compare'e (Paris, L’Harmattan), (2007): 145-191.

- Sassen, S. “The global city”, New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton, (1991)

- Schmidt, Vivien A. "Europeanization and the mechanics of economic policy adjustment." Journal of European Public Policy 9.6 (2002): 894-912.

- Schmidt, Vivien A. "Procedural democracy in the EU: the Europeanization of national and sectoral policy-making processes." Journal of European Public Policy 13.5 (2006): 670-691.

- Schmidt-Eichstaedt, Gerd, Städtebaurecht, „Einführung und Handbuch“, Stuttgart, 2005.

- Statistiches Bundesamt (ed.). Bevölkerung Deutchlands bis 2060. 12. Koordinierte Bevolkerungsvorausberechnung. Wiesbden: Statistiches Bundesamt, (2009).

- Schmidt, Stephan. "Land Use Planning Tools and Institutional Change in Germany: Recent Developments in Local and Regional Planning." European Planning Studies 17.12 (2009): 1907-1921.

- Schmitz, G. „Regionalplanung.“ In ARL — Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed) Handwörterbuch der Raumordnung (pp. 963 — 973). Hannover: ARL, (2005).

- Scholl, B., Elgendy, H. and Nollert, M. „Spatial Planning in Germany, formal structure and future tasks,“ Karlsruhe: Schriftenreihe des Instituts für Städtebau und Landesplanung an der Universität Karlsruhe, 35, (2007).

- Sinz, Manfred: „Raumordnung/Raumordnungspolitik,“ in Handwörterbuch der Raumordnung, Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (ed.), Hannover (2005): 863-872.

- Solly, Alys. “The europeanization of spatial planning: the case of Sweden.” Diss. Politecnico di Torino, 2013.

- Stead, Dominic, and Giancarlo, Cotella. "Differential Europe: Domestic actors and their role in shaping spatial planning systems." disP-The Planning Review 47.186 (2011): 13-21.

- Steger, C. O. And Bunzel, A. (eds). Raumordnungsplanung quo vadis? Zwischen notwendiger Flankierung der kommunale Bauleitplanung und unzulässigem Durchgriff. Wiesbaden: Kommunalu. Schul- Verlag, (2012).

- Theesfeld, Insa, and Christian Schleyer. "Germany’s Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive-between Integration and Coordination in a Multi-level Context. Paper presented at the ESEE 2011 conference at Bogazifi University in Istanbul, June 14-17th, 2011".

- Toens, Katrin. "Lobbying for justice? Organized welfare in Germany under the impact of Europeanization." European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 10.10 (2006).

- UNECE — United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. “Spatial Planning: Key Instrument for Development and Effective Governance with Special Reference to Countries in Transition”, New York & Geneva: United Nations, (2008).

- Versluis, Esther. "Explaining variations in implementation of EU directives." European integration online papers (EIoP) 8 (2004): 19.

- Vickerman, Roger. "Location, accessibility and regional development: the appraisal of trans-European networks." Transport Policy 2.4 (1995): 225-234.

- Walsh, Cormac. "Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020: Towards an Inclusive, Smart and Sustainable Europe of Diverse Regions." Planning Theory & Practice 13.3 (2012): 493-496.

- Waterhout, Bas. "European organisations and the institutionalisation of a territorial dimension in EU policy." European Territorial Governance 35. In de Vries, Jochem, and Wil Zonneveld.

- European Territorial Governance. IOS Press, 2012.

- Waterhout, Bas. “The institutionalisation of European spatial planning.” Vol. 18. IOS Press, 2008.

Weiland, Ulrike. "Strategic environmental assessment in Germany—practice and open questions." Environmental Impact Assessment Review 30.3 (2010): 211-217.

- Wende, Wolfgang. "Evaluation of the effectiveness and quality of environmental impact assessment in the Federal Republic of Germany." Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 20.2 (2002): 93-99.

- Wild, Trevor, and Philip N. Jones. "Spatial impacts of German unification." Geographical Journal (1994): 1-16.

- Wishlade, F., Yuill, D. & Me'ndez, C. Regional Policy in the EU: A Passing Phase of Europeanisation or a Complex Case of Policy Transfer? Regional and Industrial Policy Research Paper No. 50 (Glasgow, EPRC European Policies Research Centre, University of Strathclyde), (2003).

- Wolman, Harold, and Ed Page. "Policy transfer among local governments: An information—theory approach." Governance 15.4 (2002): 577-501.

- Zweigert, K., Kötz, H., Weir, T. (1987). An Introduction to Comparative Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press.


- Association of European Schools of Planning - AESOP, http://www.aesop-planning.eu/ (last consulted 06/11/2014)

- BauGB Baugesetzbuch, the Federal Building Code: http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/BauGB.htm (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- BBR (Federal Office for Building and Spatial Planning) http://www.bbr.bund.de/ (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- BBSR (Federal Institute for Research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development http://www.bbsr.bund.de/ (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- COMMIN, The Baltic Sea Concept-share, http://www.commin.org/ (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- EU Regional Policy - InfoRegio, http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/ (last consulted 19/01/2015)

- European Commission - Environment, http: //ec.europa.eu/environment/ (last consulted 11/03/2014)

- European Commission - Transport, http: //ec.europa.eu/transport/ (last consulted 04/11/2014)

- European Union ESPON Programme, http://www.espon.eu/ (last consulted 11/05/2014)

- Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, http://www.bundesregierung.de/ (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- Federal Statistical Office of Germany: https://www.destatis.de/EN/ (last consulted 30/01/2015)

- German Academy for Spatial Planning: http://www.arl-net.de (last consulted 19/12/2014)

- German Academy for Spatial Research and Planning, http://www.arl-net.de/ (last consulted 06/11/2014)

- German Federal Agency for Cartography and Geodesy: http://www.bkg.bund.de/ (last consulted 18/12/2014)

- German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, http: // www.bfn.de/ 11/03/2014

- German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, http://www.bmwi.de/ (last consulted 11/04/2014)

- German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety, http://www.bmub.bund.de/ (last consulted 11/03/2014)

- HafenCity website: http://www.hafencity.com/ (last consulted 29/10/2014)

- Hamburg Metropolitan Region: http://english.metropolregion.hamburg.de/ (last consulted 19/12/2014)

- INTEREG IV C Programme, http://www.interreg4c.eu/ (last consulted 04/11/2014)

- Jutland Corridor (http://www.hamburg.de/urma-en/ last consulted 16/02/2014)

Modify record (reserved for operators) Modify record (reserved for operators)