Building metropolitan governance in Spain. Madrid and Barcelona
The aim of this chapter is to assess area-wide governance in the two largest Spanish metropolitan areas: Madrid and Barcelona. As examined in the first sections, both cases show different patterns of governance, even if they are embedded in a common political and territorial structure. In the follow...
| Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | book part |
| Status: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Publication Date: | 2005 |
| Country: | España |
| Institution: | Universidad de Barcelona |
| Repository: | Dipòsit Digital de la UB |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/223476 |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/2445/223476 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Àrees metropolitanes Política urbana Metropolitan areas Urban policy |
| Summary: | The aim of this chapter is to assess area-wide governance in the two largest Spanish metropolitan areas: Madrid and Barcelona. As examined in the first sections, both cases show different patterns of governance, even if they are embedded in a common political and territorial structure. In the following section of the chapter we analyse their specific characteristics in relation to the three dimensions of metropolitan democracy: the tension of policy networks (openness/closeness), the legitimisation of local governments (input/output oriented) and the relationships between the state and civil society. Madrid and Barcelona present different strategies in the development of their metropolitan characteristics, based on place-specific combinations of the three dimensions. Since 1983, the city of Madrid has had a metropolitan structure (the government of the Autonomous Community) that has coordinated the relationships between actors and has legitimised the decision-making process and implementation of public policies in an orderly way. Barcelona, however, is characterised by metropolitan fragmentation and difficult relationships between governmental actors. Nevertheless, the coalition of several sectors of civil society (such as employers’ organisations, chambers of commerce and representatives from the financial sector) with local and regional authorities has helped to avoid the ‘joint decision trap’ (Scharpf 1988) thanks to the challenge of hosting place-related events (specially the 1992 Olympic Games). |
|---|