Towards coordination of spatial relations

Understanding Chinese mega-regionalization from a secondary city perspective

Journal Article (2024)
Author(s)

Y. Du (TU Delft - Spatial Planning and Strategy)

Rodrigo Viseu Viseu Cardoso (TU Delft - Spatial Planning and Strategy)

R.C. Rocco (TU Delft - Spatial Planning and Strategy)

Research Group
Spatial Planning and Strategy
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105375
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2024
Language
English
Research Group
Spatial Planning and Strategy
Volume number
154
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Mega-regional planning in China is expected to tackle intra-regional unevenness, namely the development gap between regional core cities and the surrounding secondary cities. However, mega-regionalization processes seem to further increase the centrality of cores and push secondary cities towards greater polarization and peripheralization, as they lose socioeconomic vitality, industrial capacity, and political voice. To reflect on why mega-regions are not fulfilling their role of rebalancing regional urban systems, we conceptualize mega-regionalization as a mechanism to coordinate spatial relations within a territory and build a novel framework to analyze the relations between core and secondary cities. First, we show that visions of mega-regional planning regarding core-secondary relations pursue goals of morphological polycentricity, flow multi-directionality, and functional complementarity. Then, we use thematic analysis to evaluate the policy orientations of mega-regional planning to achieve these goals and extract three policy themes governing core-secondary spatial relations - coexistence, connectivity, and cooperation. These can systematically redefine mega-regional planning mechanisms by giving a central role to the spatial relations between core and secondary cities. Emphasizing spatial relations to conceptualize mega-regional governance allows a novel reflection on the challenges of unevenness grounded in the perspective of secondary cities. This deepens our understanding of governance mismatches that keep ideal visions and policy orientations misaligned when seen from secondary cities. Place, priority, and actor mismatches limit the potential of mega-regionalization to respond to their challenges. This research provides a relational understanding of mega-regions, calling for more attention to secondary cities, and the development of more balanced and sustainable mega-regions.