FOLIA GEOGRAPHICA

Menu

Folia Geographica 2014, 56/2, pp. 41-55

DISKURZ A NEOLIBERALIZMUS V REGIÓNE: Kriticko-geografický prístup

DISCOURSE AND NEOLIBERALISM IN REGION: Critical Geographical Approach

Miloslav MICHALKO A*

Received: May 15, 2014 | Revised: June 30, 2014 | Accepted: September 10, 2014

A* University of Prešov, 17. novembra 1, 08001 Prešov, Slovakia
miloslav.michalko@unipo.sk (corresponding author)

PDF FULL TEXT ►


Abstract
In our paper, we rely on some findings from the doctoral thesis: *Critical-Geographical Analysis of Regional Policy: Theoretical-Methodological Base and Empirical Application of the Case of Prešov Self-Governing Region* (Michalko, 2013). We focus on the issue of discourse as a post-structuralist point of view on society and its connection to the neoliberal phenomenon affecting regions. We will try to demonstrate this connection by an example of the analysis of selected aspects in regional planning in the Prešov Self-Governing Region. Finally, we will evaluate synthetically the examined issue.

Key words
Discourse, neoliberalism, regional planning, instrumental rationality, governmentality

SUMMARY

DISCOURSE AND NEOLIBERALISM IN REGION: Critical-Geographical Approach

In our paper, we focused on the issue of discourse as a post-structuralist point of view on society and its connection to the neoliberal phenomenon affecting regions. We have tried to demonstrate this connection by an example of the analysis of selected aspects in regional planning in the Prešov Self-Governing Region. The synthesis of knowledge was based on understanding neoliberalism as a freedom governor, as a bearer of its own discourse. For this governor, it is characteristic to constantly dictate changes in setting conditions in space, which lies in its dynamic nature. Thus, it is preparing open regions to make their local potential become global capital. Into these dynamic conditions, additional sudden changes in mood or direction, both at national and regional levels (new elections – change of direction), are entering, so planning is generally complicated. Neoliberalism as a freedom governor creates, in our conditions, its own suitable top-down planning (discourse), which is characterized by an instrumental view of space. Its purposeful character confirms the finding that governments often plan only under the challenges for EU grants, and so are significantly limited, indirectly governmentally managed, and weakly self-governed. This results in the understanding of planning as a process in which the social absorbs the economic, and thus forms the space as a social construct towards increasing instrumental rationality within it.

REFERENCES

  1. AMDAM, R. (2001). “Empowering New Regional Political Institutions: A Norwegian Case” [online]. *Planning Theory & Practice*, 2(2), 169–185. Cited: 12.8.2011. Available at: .
  2. AMDAM, R. (2006). *The Governance Turn in Public Health and Regional Planning*. Notat nr. 13/2006. Høgskulen i Volda og Møreforsking Volda, 25 p.
  3. BAETEN, G. (2012). “Neoliberal Planning: Does It Really Exist?”. In: Taşan-Kok, T., Baeten, G. (eds.), *Contradictions of Neoliberal Planning*. The GeoJournal Library 102. DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-8924-3_11.
  4. BELL, D. (1976). *Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism*. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers, 301 p.
  5. BERG, D. (2009). “Discourse Analysis”. In: Kitchin, R., Thrift, N. (eds.), *International Encyclopedia of Human Geography*, Vol. 2. Oxford: Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-08-044913-5.
  6. BLAŽEK, J., UHLÍŘ, D. (2011). *Teorie regionálního rozvoje: nástin, kritika, implikace*. 2nd ed. Praha: Karolinum, 342 p. ISBN 978-80-246-1974-3.
  7. DUNN, W. (2006). “A Critical Theory of New Public Management” [online]. Cited: 3.7.2012. Available at: .
  8. DUNN, W., MILLER, Y. (2007). “A Critique of the New Public Management and the Neo-Weberian State: Advancing a Critical Theory of Administrative Reform”. *Public Organiz Rev*, 7, 345–358. Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2007.
  9. FOUCAULT, M. (2003). *Dějiny sexuality I*. Herrmann & synové, 192 p.
  10. FOUCAULT, M. (2003b). *Dějiny sexuality II, III*. Herrmann & synové, 664 p.
  11. FOUCAULT, M. (2004). *Dozerať a trestať*. Bratislava: Kalligram, 312 p.
  12. FOUCAULT, M. (2009). *Zrození biopolitiky: kurz na Collége de France (1978-1979)*. Brno: CDK, 351 p. ISBN 978-80-7325-181-9.
  13. HABERMAS, J. (2000). *Strukturální proměna veřejnosti*. Praha: Nakladatelství FÚ AVČR, 424 p. ISBN 80-7007-134-6.
  14. HABERMAS, J. (2011). *Teória jazyka a východiská sociálnych vied*. Bratislava: Kalligram, 669 p.
  15. HAJER, M. (2006). “Doing Discourse Analysis”. In: Brink, M., Metze, T. (eds.), *Words Matter in Policy and Planning. Discourse Theory and Method in Social Sciences*. Utrecht: Labor Grafimedia, 187 p.
  16. HARVEY, D. (2005). *Spaces of Neoliberalization. Towards a Theory of Uneven Geographical Development*. Franz Steiner Verlag, 131 p. ISBN 3-515-08746-X.
  17. KAŠČÁK, O., PUPALA, B. (2010). “Neoliberálna guvernmentalita v sociálnom projektovaní vzdelávania”. *Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review*, 46(5), 771–799. Praha.
  18. LEMKE, T. (2010). *Biopolityka*. Warszawa: Sic!, 150 p. ISBN 978-83-60457-96-2.
  19. LOVERING, J. (1998). “Theory Led by Policy? The Inadequacies of ‘the New Regionalism’ in Economic Geography Illustrated from the Case of Wales” [online]. *Economic Geography Research Group Seminar ‘Institutions and Governance’*. London: Department of Geography UCL, 3 July 1998. Cited: 12.3.2012. Available at: .
  20. 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, 581–594. ISBN: 978-0-203-84239-3.
  21. LÖWY, M. (2012). “Marx, Weber and the Critique of Capitalism”. *Logos, a Journal of Modern Society & Culture*, 1(3), Summer 2002. Cited: 10.5.2012. Available at: .
  22. MICHALKO, M. (2012). “Priestor ako hlavný koncept výskumu geografie. Smerom ku kritickému konceptu priestoru”. *Acta Facultatis Studiorum Humanitatis et Naturae Universitatis Prešoviensis, Prírodné vedy, Folia Geographica*, 19, PU Prešov, 196–209.
  23. MICHALKO, M. (2013). *Kriticko-geografická analýza regionálnej politiky: Teoreticko-metodologická báza a empirická aplikácia na príklade Prešovského samosprávneho kraja* [dizertačná práca]. Prešov: FHPV PU, 145 p.
  24. PHSR PSK 2008–2015. *Program hospodárskeho a sociálneho rozvoja PSK* [online]. Cited: 20.4.2013. Available at: .
  25. PLEŠTINSKÁ, Z. (2010). “Centralizmus alebo riadenie európskych fondov z regiónov?” [online]. Cited: 22.2.2011. Available at: .
  26. SHARP, L., RICHARDSON, T. (2001). “Reflections on Foucauldian Discourse Analysis in Planning and Environmental Policy Research”. *Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning*, 3, 193–209.
  27. SPRINGER, S. (2012). “Neoliberalism as Discourse: Between Foucauldian Political Economy and Marxian Poststructuralism”. *Critical Discourse Studies*, 9(2), May 2012, 133–147.