Polycentricity – one concept or many?

Abstract

This paper aims to discuss polycentrism and its implications. Polycentricity plays a key role in EU Cohesion Policy and has done so since 1999 when the notion was included in the European Spatial Development Perspective. Politically, it emerged as a key tool because of its ability to fuse together the two primary and conflicting perceptions of spatial–economic development, cohesion and competitiveness. No agreed definition of polycentricity exists. Furthermore, different actors and disciplines define polycentrism differently. The absence of a concise and coherent definition makes it difficult to measure polycentricity. Moreover, several studies have concluded that it is difficult to identify empirical evidence to support the positive claims made in its name. Polycentrism is assumed toolbox to reduce regional disparities, but polycentric countries display higher regional disparities than monocentric countries. Polycentric countries do not perform better than monocentric countries with regard to competitiveness and GDP/cap. As such, this paper concludes that not only does the political meaning of polycentricity struggle over aims with the inherit dichotomy at its heart, it also struggles in terms of basic credibility.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 90 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.