Speaker
Description
Despite strategy papers and guidelines such as the Territorial Agenda 2030 of the European Union (2020) that define common European objectives and orientations for territorial development, planning practice among EU member states remains rather variegated. These differences become particularly apparent in cross-border spatial planning contexts when attempting to navigate the “balancing act between two planning systems” (Jacobs, 2016) to steer the spatial development of a borderland.
In order to study planning practices and cultures along national borders, the UniGR-CBS Spatial Planning Working Group has developed an experimental planning game methodology – an innovative, intercultural tool based on Othengrafen and Knieling’s (2015) concept of planning culture, which manifests itself through the layers of planning artefacts, planning environment and societal environment. The game unfolds in several phases, involving both intra-team and inter-team negotiations to simulate the collaborative development of a planning concept for a fictional cross-border area. Through gameplay observations and reflexion rounds, researchers gain insights into players’ experiences, knowledge and interactions within a cross-border context.
Empirical evidence from recurring planning game sessions (2017, 2019 and 2022) with planning practitioners and students from the “Greater Region” (Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Luxembourg, Wallonia and Grand-Est) shows that planners from neighbouring sub-regions often follow divergent approaches when in action: interpretations of the same planning paradigms differ significantly, thus causing diverging planning outputs. Furthermore, spatial planning approaches and concepts are often understood and implemented differently in the sub-regions which illuminates the geographically diverging character of planning cultures.
We conclude that the absence of a shared planning culture fosters conflicting planning practices at state borders, making the teaching of planning cultures crucial for effectively facilitating cross-border spatial planning. The ‘planning environmental layer’ of Knieling and Othengrafen’s planning culture concept - defining planners’ values and beliefs about spatial planning goals - is heavily influenced by national planning education systems.
Spatial planning educational programmes are typically nationally focused, following path-dependent curricula and syllabi rooted in distinct scientific disciplines. As a result, students primarily absorb domestic planning cultures unless they get study experiences from abroad, through student exchange programmes, dual degree programmes or internships abroad. The latter help them to gain exposure to other planning approaches. Furthermore, in cross-border regions such as the “Greater Region”, where transnational interdependencies frequently occur and a cross-border spatial development concept was recently introduced, planners need strong intercultural competencies to support cross-border cooperation.
Against this background, the Laboratory of Territorial Intelligence (LATI) project, funded by INTERREG VI A Greater Region, places particular focus not only on fostering cross-border cooperation in spatial planning, but also to develop planning games for students as a key educational tool designed to enhance intercultural cross-border planning competences. By simulating the development of a transnational planning concept, the new game encourages students (a) to familiarise themselves with other planning cultures, (b) to develop a deeper intercultural understanding and (c) to engage in collaborative problem solving by learning how to negotiate, collaborate and compromise – essential skills for navigating and managing planning cultures. The student planning game complements traditional educational approaches by incorporating participatory and experiential learning.
By equipping future planners with concrete experiences in collaborative cross-border spatial planning, the planning game could contribute to developing more cohesive and effective spatial development strategies. This not only strengthens cross-border cooperation but also contributes to achieving the objectives outlined in the Cross-border Spatial Development Concept of the Greater Region (2023).
| Keywords | cross-border spatial planning; planning cultures; Greater Region; experimental games |
|---|
