New State Spaces

doi:10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780199270057.001.0001

Monograph•DOI•

New State Spaces

09 Sep 2004-

About: The article was published on 2004-09-09. It has received 1730 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: State (functional analysis).

...read moreread less

Citations

PDF

Open Access

More filters

Journal Article•DOI•

Editorial: Mobilities, Immobilities and Moorings

[...]

Kevin Hannam¹, Mimi Sheller², John Urry³•Institutions (3)

University of Sunderland¹, Swarthmore College², Lancaster University³

20 Aug 2006-Mobilities

TL;DR: Mobility has become an evocative keyword for the twenty-first century and a powerful discourse that creates its own effects and contexts as mentioned in this paper, and the concept of mobilities encompasses both the large-scale...

...read moreread less

1,457 citations

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

...New economic and political geographies of ‘state rescaling’ and urban restructuring emphasize the historicity of social space, the polymorphism of geographies, the restructuring of scale and the remaking of state space (see Brenner, 2004; Brenner & Theodore, 2002)....
[...]
...…Westphalian model of statehood’ based on national-territorial containers towards more ‘complex, polymorphic, and multiscalar regulatory geographies’ (Brenner, 2004, p.67) is, we would add, fundamentally related to the emergence of complex mobility systems and their restructuring of both space…...
[...]
...…‘contemporary round of global restructuring has entailed neither the absolute territorialization of societies, economies, or cultures onto a global scale, nor their complete deterritorialization into a supraterritorial, distanceless, placeless, or borderless space of flows’ (Brenner, 2004, p.64)....
[...]
...…of superimposed and interpenetrating nodes, levels, scales, and morphologies has become more appropriate than the traditional Cartesian model of homogenous, self-enclosed and contiguous blocks of territory that has long been used to describe the modern interstate system’ (Brenner, 2004, p.66)....
[...]
...…has been a debate about the relation between municipal, state, regional and federal governments, each of which has been restructuring according to different spatial projects and spatial strategies, at different scales and in response to different challenges and pressures (see Brenner, 2004)....
[...]

Journal Article•DOI•

Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance-beyond-the-State:

[...]

Erik Swyngedouw

01 Oct 2005-Urban Studies

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors argue that the emerging innovative horizontal and networked arrangements of governance-beyond-the-state are decidedly Janus-faced, particularly under conditions in which the democratic character of the political sphere is increasingly eroded by the encroaching imposition of market forces that set the "rules of the game".

...read moreread less

Abstract: Summary. This paper focuses on the fifth dimension of social innovation—i.e. political governance. Although largely neglected in the mainstream ‘innovation’ literature, innovative governance arrangements are increasingly recognised as potentially significant terrains for fostering inclusive development processes. International organisations like the EU and the World Bank, as well as leading grass-roots movements, have pioneered new and more participatory governance arrangements as a pathway towards greater inclusiveness. Indeed, over the past two decades or so, a range of new and often innovative institutional arrangements has emerged, at a variety of geographical scales. These new institutional ‘fixes’ have begun to challenge traditional state-centred forms of policy-making and have generated new forms of governance-beyond-thestate. Drawing on Foucault’s notion of governmentality, the paper argues that the emerging innovative horizontal and networked arrangements of governance-beyond-the-state are decidedly Janus-faced. While enabling new forms of participation and articulating the state‐ civil society relationships in potentially democratising ways, there is also a flip side to the process. To the extent that new governance arrangements rearticulate the state-civil society relationship, they also redefine and reposition the meaning of (political) citizenship and, consequently, the nature of democracy itself. The first part of the paper outlines the contours of governance-beyond-the-state. The second part addresses the thorny issues of the state‐civil society relationship in the context of the emergence of the new governmentality associated with governance-beyond-the-state. The third part teases out the contradictory way in which new arrangements of governance have created new institutions and empowered new actors, while disempowering others. It is argued that this shift from ‘government’ to ‘governance’ is associated with the consolidation of new technologies of government, on the one hand, and with profound restructuring of the parameters of political democracy on the other, leading to a substantial democratic deficit. The paper concludes by suggesting that socially innovative arrangements of governance-beyond-the-state are fundamentally Janus-faced, particularly under conditions in which the democratic character of the political sphere is increasingly eroded by the encroaching imposition of market forces that set the ‘rules of the game’.

...read moreread less

1,407 citations

Journal Article•DOI•

Variegated neoliberalization: geographies, modalities, pathways

[...]

Neil Brenner¹, Jamie Peck², Nik Theodore³•Institutions (3)

New York University¹, University of British Columbia², University of Illinois at Chicago³

01 Apr 2010-Global Networks-a Journal of Transnational Affairs

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider the handling of "neoliberalism" within three influential strands of heterodox political economy: the varieties of capitalism approach, historical materialist international political economy; and governmentality approaches.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Across the broad field of heterodox political economy, ‘neoliberalism’ appears to have become a rascal concept – promiscuously pervasive, yet inconsistently defined, empirically imprecise and frequently contested. Controversies regarding its precise meaning are more than merely semantic. They generally flow from underlying disagreements regarding the sources, expressions and implications of contemporary regulatory transformations. In this article, we consider the handling of ‘neoliberalism’ within three influential strands of heterodox political economy – the varieties of capitalism approach; historical materialist international political economy; and governmentality approaches. While each of these research traditions sheds light on contemporary processes of market-oriented regulatory restructuring, we argue that each also underplays and/or misreads the systemically uneven, or ‘variegated’, character of these processes. Enabled by a critical interrogation of how each approach interprets the geographies, modalities and pathways of neoliberalization processes, we argue that the problematic of variegation must be central to any adequate account of marketized forms of regulatory restructuring and their alternatives under post-1970s capitalism. Our approach emphasizes the cumulative impacts of successive ‘waves’ of neoliberalization upon uneven institutional landscapes, in particular: (a) their establishment of interconnected, mutually recursive policy relays within an increasingly transnational field of market-oriented regulatory transfer; and (b) their infiltration and reworking of the geoinstitutional frameworks, or ‘rule regimes’, within which regulatory experimentation unfolds. This mode of analysis has significant implications for interpreting the current global economic crisis.

...read moreread less

1,375 citations

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

...…however, to equate a concern with the uneven (macro-) patterning of regulatory landscapes, rule regimes and the construction of interspatial systems of policy transfer with an endorsement of such indefensible methodological tendencies (cf. Brenner 2004 ; Peck 2002; Peck et al. 2009)....
[...]

Journal Article•DOI•

The 21st-Century Metropolis: New Geographies of Theory

[...]

Ananya Roy¹•Institutions (1)

University of California, Berkeley¹

04 Aug 2009-Regional Studies

TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the dominant theorizations of global city-regions are rooted in the EuroAmerican experience and are thus unable to analyse multiple forms of metropolitan modernities.

...read moreread less

Abstract: Roy A. The 21st-century metropolis: new geographies of theory, Regional Studies. This paper calls for ‘new geographies’ of imagination and epistemology in the production of urban and regional theory. It argues that the dominant theorizations of global city-regions are rooted in the EuroAmerican experience and are thus unable to analyse multiple forms of metropolitan modernities. By drawing on the urban experience of the global South, the paper presents new conceptual vectors for understanding the worlding of cities, the production of space, and the dynamics of exurbanity. It makes the case that such area-based knowledge deepens recent theoretical attempts to articulate a relational study of space and place. Roy A. Les metropoles du XXIe siecle: nouvelle geographie de la theorie, Regional Studies. Cet article appelle a de nouvelles geographies de l'imagination et de l'epistemologie pour la production de theories urbaines et regionales. Il avance que les theorisations dominantes des villes-regions du monde ...

...read moreread less

926 citations

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

...The concern here is not only with uneven spatial development, but also with modes of regulation that manage and displace the crises of capitalism, as in the work of BRENNER (2004), BRENNER and THEODORE (2002), and JESSOP (1994)....
[...]
...These too are, to borrow a term from BRENNER (2004), ‘state spaces’....
[...]

Journal Article•DOI•

Theorizing Sociospatial Relations

[...]

Bob Jessop¹, Neil Brenner², Martin Jones³•Institutions (3)

Lancaster University¹, New York University², Aberystwyth University³

01 Jan 2008-Environment and Planning D-society & Space

TL;DR: The TPSN framework as mentioned in this paper proposes that territories (T), places (P), scales (S), and networks (N) must be viewed as mutually constitutive and relationally intertwined dimensions of sociospatial relations.

...read moreread less

Abstract: This essay seeks to reframe recent debates on sociospatial theory through the introduction of an approach that can grasp the inherently polymorphic, multidimensional character of sociospatial relations. As previous advocates of a scalar turn, we now question the privileging, in any form, of a single dimension of sociospatial processes, scalar or otherwise. We consider several recent sophisti- cated 'turns' within critical social science; explore their methodological limitations; and highlight several important strands of sociospatial theory that seek to transcend the latter. On this basis, we argue for a more systematic recognition of polymorphythe organization of sociospatial relations in multiple formswithin sociospatial theory. Specifically, we suggest that territories (T), places (P), scales (S), and networks (N) must be viewed as mutually constitutive and relationally intertwined dimensions of sociospatial relations. We present this proposition as an extension of recent contribu- tions to the spatialization of the strategic-relational approach (SRA), and we explore some of its methodological implications. We conclude by briefly illustrating the applicability of the 'TPSN framework' to several realms of inquiry into sociospatial processes under contemporary capitalism.

...read moreread less

915 citations

Collapse

New State Spaces

Citations

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

Cites background from "New State Spaces"

Related Papers (5)