FOLIA GEOGRAPHICA

Menu

FOLIA GEOGRAPHICA 2013 (21), LV., pp. 67-83

Kritická Regionálna Politika
Hľadanie Pozície Geografa

Critical Regional Policy
Searching of Geographer Position

Miloslav Michalko A*

Received: November 10, 2012 | Revised: January 10, 2013 | Accepted: March 10, 2013

A* University of Prešov, 17. novembra 1, 080 01 Prešov, Slovakia mki.michalko@gmail.com (corresponding author)

PDF FULL TEXT

Abstract

In this paper we will try to introduce theoretical stance of regional policy in the light of contemporary forms of neoliberalism that are steering our society. In the first section we evaluate region as basis for regional policy and we are showing base definitions of regional policy. In the second section we focus on critical point of view of regional policy in the context of changes in space governance. The last section describes our understanding of methodological aspects of regional policy from critical-geographical optics.

Key words: Regional policy, neoliberalism, critical regional policy, critical methodology, position of geographer

Summary

Critical Regional Policy
Searching of Geographer Position

The issue of regional policy is very heterogeneous and thus it is possible to look at it from several angles. We chose a critical-geographical optics based on poststructuralist methodological point of view, where we look at the space not as it is an absolute container of objects, but as a relational space, which is the result of social interactions between entities of space. From this perspective, we see space as a social construct of trust, relationships and institutional terms. The aim of this contribution was to evaluate theoretical stance of regional policy in the current neoliberal era. Defined goal we tried to accomplish by studying of the critically-oriented works. They focused on the new regional policy, largely reproaching its instrumental character and on the other side depicting its structural nature, where they identify the necessity of formal or informal alliances. These alliances are formed for the purpose of capital and mainly used for capital. Such alliances can be Regional Service Classes (Lovering), Growth Coalitions (Logan, Molotch) or Territorial Alliance (Harvey). These alliances are often the result of the implementation of the new public management into the institutional sphere, which has a strong neoliberal nature. A secondary objective was an effort to define the geographer position in this issue. As Martin says (2011) that every non-spatial policy has its spatial implications, it can be seen the position geographer, whose ambition is to be seeking opportunities to maintain spatial and social justice in the processes of regional policy, as well as analysis and explanation of the above mentioned alliances positions and their impact on making of public policies. These categories should be examined by geographer through critical analysis of public policy. In this context, possible methods appear case studies, ethnographic approaches and discursive analysis. Martin (2011) calls for the use of critical analysis of political discourses and practices that reveal their ideological or instrumental content.

References

  1. ALLEN, J., MASSEY, A., COCHRAN, A. 2002. Re-Thinking the Region. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2002. 159 s. ISBN 0-203-00750-6.
  2. AMDAM, R. 2001. Empowering New Regional Political Institutions: A Norwegian Case [online]. In Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 2, No. 2, p. 169-185. [cit. 2011-8-12]. Dostupné na internete: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14649350120068786.
  3. AMDAM, R. 2006. The governance turn in public health and regional planning. Notat nr. 13/2006. Høgskulen i Volda og Møreforsking Volda, 25 s.
  4. BAUDRILLARD, J. 1995. Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press, 1995. 164 s. ISBN 978-0472065219.
  5. BAUMANN, Z. 2011. No one is in control. That is the major source of contemporary fear – video [online]. [cit. 2012-5-12]. Dostupné na internete: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2011/sep/01/zygmunt-bauman-terrorism-video.
  6. BLAŽEK, J., UHLÍŘ, D. 2011. Teorie regionálního rozvoje: nástin, kritika, implikace. Vyd. 2., Praha: Karolium, 2011. 342 s. ISBN 978-80-246-1974-3.
  7. CASTELLS, M. 2003. The Internet Galaxy. Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society. Oxford University Press, 2003. 304 s. ISBN 978-0199255771.
  8. CUMBERS, A. 2009. Marxism/Marxist Geography. In Kitchin, R., Thrift, N. eds. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography. Vol. 6, Oxford: Elsevier, 2009. ISBN 978-0-08-044917-3.
  9. DUNN, W. 2006. A critical theory of new public management [online]. [cit. 2012-7-03]. Dostupné na internete: www.bambangkesit.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/bagii-03-a-critical-theory-of-npm.pdf.
  10. ERAYDIN, A. 2011. Changing importance of quantitative methods in regional development and planning [online]. In TU A|Z, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2011-2, p. 4-16, [cit. 2012-5-22]. Dostupné na internete: www.az.itu.edu.tr/azv8no2web/04-eraydin-08-02.pdf.
  11. HABERMAS, J. 2000. Strukturálni proměna veřejnosti. Filosofia, Praha: Nakladatelství FÚ AVČR, 424 s. ISBN 80-7007-134-6.
  12. HABERMAS, J. 2011. Teória jazyka a východiská sociálnych vied. Bratislava: Kalligram, 669 s.
  13. HARDIN, R. 2009. Zaufanie, Warszawa: Sic!, 2009. 212 s.
  14. HARVEY, D. 2008. Neoliberalism. Historia katastrofy. Warszawa: Książka i Prasa, 2008. 297 s. ISBN 978-83-8835-357-4.
  15. HUBBARD, Ph. et al. 2005. Thinking geographically: space, theory, and contemporary human geography. London: Continuum, 2005. 275 s. ISBN 0-8264-7771-2.
  16. KAŠČÁK, O., PUPALA, B. 2010. Neoliberálna guvernmentalita v sociálnom projektovaní vzdelávania. In Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 2010, Vol. 46, No. 5, Praha, 2010, s. 771 – 799.
  17. KLAMÁR, 2011. Vývoj regionálnych disparít na Slovensku s osobitným zreteľom na regióny východného Slovenska. In Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica. 18, PU Prešov, s. 89 – 170.
  18. KOREC, P. 2005. Regionálny rozvoj Slovenska v rokoch 1989-2004: Identifikácia menej rozvinutých regiónov Slovenska. Bratislava: Geo-grafika, 2005. 228 s.
  19. KOREC, P. 2007. Vplyv post-industriálneho štádia vývoja spoločnosti a globalizácie na regionálny vývoj Slovenska. In Geographia Cassoviensis. I., 2007. s. 75 – 80.
  20. KOREC, P. 2009. Štrukturálne zmeny ekonomiky Slovenska v prvej etape spoločenskej transformácie v regionálnom kontexte. In Geographia Moravica 1, Halás, M., Klapka, P., Szczyrba, Z. eds., Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, 2009. s. 11 – 26.
  21. LANE, J.-E. 2002. New Public Management. London: Routledge, 2002. 242 s. ISBN 0-203-46732-9.
  22. LOGAN, J., MOLOTCH, H. 2007. Urban Fortunes. The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2007. 413 s. ISBN 978-0520254282.
  23. LOVERING, 1998. Theory led by policy? The inadequacies of ‘the new regionalism’ in economic geography illustrated from the case of Wales [online]. In Economic Geography Research Group Seminar ‘Institutions and Governance’. London Department of Geography UCL. July 3, 1998. [cit. 2012-03-12]. Dostupné na internete: egrg.org.uk/pdfs/lovering.pdf.
  24. LOVERING, J. 2011. The new regional governance and the hegemony of neoliberalism. In Pike, A., Rodríguez-Pose, A., Tomaney, J. eds. Handbook of Local and Regional Development. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2011. s. 581 – 594. ISBN: 978-0-203-84239-3.
  25. LÖWY, M. 2012. Marx, Weber and the Critique of Capitalism. In Logos, a journal of modern society & culture, Vol. 1 issue 3, summer 2002. [cit. 2012-5-10]. Dostupné na internete: www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?page=print_article&id_article=1106.
  26. ĽUBA, M. 2011. Transformácia volebného systému v SR: Voľby do NR SR a perspektíva unifikácie volebného systému [online]. [cit. 2011-06-03]. Dostupné na internete: www.otvorenepravo.sk/m/clanok/84/transformacia-volebneho-systemu-v-sr.
  27. MARTIN, R., 2001. Geography and public policy: the case of the missing agenda. Progress in Human Geography 25, 189 – 210.
  28. MATLOVIČ, R. 2006a. Geografia – hľadanie tmelu (k otázke autonómie a jednoty geografie, jej externej pozície a inštitucionálneho začlenenia so zreteľom na slovenskú situáciu). In Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica. 9, PU Prešov, s. 6 – 43.
  29. MATLOVIČ, R. 2006b. K problematike hľadania platformy symbiózy idiografického a nomotetického spôsobu produkcie geografických poznatkov. Geografická revue, 2, 2, 25 – 39.
  30. MATLOVIČ, R., MATLOVIČOVÁ, K. 2007. Koncept miesta vo vývoji geografického myslenia. In: Kraft, S., Mičková, K., Rypl, J., Švec, P., Vančura, M. eds. Česká geografie v evropském prostoru. České Budějovice: Jihočeská univerzita, 2007. s. 181 – 190.
  31. MATLOVIČ, R. 2007. Hybridná idiograficko-nomotetická povaha geografie a koncept miesta s dôrazom na humánnu geografiu. In Geografický časopis. 2007, 59, 1, s. 3 – 23.
  32. MATLOVIČ, R., MATLOVIČOVÁ, K. 2011. Regionálne disparity a ich riešenie na Slovensku v rozličných kontextoch. In Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica. 18, PU Prešov, s. 8 – 88.
  33. MASSEY, D. 1995. Spatial division of labour: social structures and geography. New York: Routhledge, 1995. 393 s. ISBN 0 415 912956 2.
  34. MIHNA, Ch. 2008. Essential characteristics of New public management and administrative reforms that need to be adopted to strengthen public administration in Africa [online]. University of Botswana, 2008. 12 s. [cit. 2012-03-16]. Dostupné na internete: http://www.scribd.com/doc/11583241/NEW-PUBLIC-MANAGEMENT.
  35. MICHAELI, E., MATLOVIČ, R., IŠTOK, R. a kol. 2010. Regionálny rozvoj pre geografov. Prešov: Vydavateľstvo prešovskej univerzity, 2010. 717 s. ISBN 978-80-555-0065-2.
  36. MICHALKO, M. 2012. Priestor ako hlavný koncept výskumu geografie. Smerom ku kritickému konceptu priestoru. In Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica. 19, PU Prešov, s. 196 – 209.
  37. PAVLÍK, Z. 1974. Na okraj kvantifikace v geografii. In Československé spoločnosti. Roč. 79, č. 2, s. 132 – 140.
  38. PEET, R. 1998. Modern Geographical Thought. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998. 342 s. ISBN 978-1-55786-378-2.
  39. POTŮČEK, M. 2005. Verejná politika. Praha: SLON, 2005. 399 s. ISBN 80-86429-50-4.
  40. RAJČÁKOVÁ, E. 2005. Regionálny rozvoj a regionálna politika. Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo UK, 2005. 120 s. ISBN 80-223-2038-2.
  41. ROGERS, S. 2009. Urban Growth Machine. In Kitchin, R., Thrift, N. International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, Vol. 2, Oxford: Elsevier. 472 s. ISBN 978-0-08-044913-5.
  42. SÝKORA, Ľ. 2008. Idiografická nebo nomotetická koncepce v geografii: kontraproduktivní spor o povahu a podstatu poznání. In Geografický časopis. 2008. 60, 3, s. 233 – 239.
  43. ŠTEFANČÍK, R., 2006. Väčšinový či pomerný volebný systém? [online]. [cit. 2011-10-15]. Dostupné na internete: www.sk-forum.sk/index.php?id=volebny_system#reprezentacia.
  44. Maastrichtská zmluva, 1992.
  45. Národný strategický referenčný rámec Slovenskej republiky na roky 2007 – 2013, 2007.
  46. Zákon č. 539/2008 Z. z. o podpore regionálneho rozvoja.
  47. Zásady regionálnej politiky ČR (1998). http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/glossary/cohesion_policy_sk.htm