COMPASS

Collective Memory & Planning: Across Social Separation

The collective memory effect on cross-border cooperation practices in Europe

Abstract

European spatial planning has emerged in a way that has (mostly) ignored the complexities associated with national borders, tending to take a monochromatic view of them as either ‘closed’ (external borders of the EU) or ‘open’ (internal borders of the EU), often rooted on a singular view of either a ‘space of places’, or a ‘space of flows’. But this view denies the much more complex, shaded reality of borders, which in reality are ambiguous human constructions, comprising a set of overlapping boundaries and which are moreover constantly in flux (more than might be imagined at first sight). This provides a certain understanding of why properly working cross-border networks are rarely found throughout Europe, despite the many financial support programmes and institutional frameworks set up by the European Union. Assuming that the planning systems mismatch is not the main root-cause of the problem, as can be learnt from successful cross-border cooperation projects, I am arguing that the missing of a truly trans-cultural understanding has to be regarded as one of the reasons why it is so difficult to build up long-lasting and effective cross-border cooperation networks. However as (planning) culture is constantly in flux and moreover beliefs, perceptions, feelings and emotions of different social groups and societies are hard to grasp, it is not surprising that these complex aspects so far have been recognised only as ‘taken-for-granted’ elements of (planning) culture in the planning research debate. Arguing that this is not enough I have elaborated an analytical model, with which it appears to be possible to address this subconscious and ‘taken-for-granted’ dimension of planning. The innovative aspect of my approach clearly lies in combining collective memory and planning culture theories and debates and provides an enlightening pathway of how to grasp and unpack ‘taken-for-granted’ generalisations about ‘the others’, which are sometimes manifested in form of negative stereotypes or even prejudices within a planning culture. Doing so it contributes substantially to the building up of trans-cultural understanding in a particular border-region and consequently to the overcoming of social separation due to a (national) border.

The main objective of this research endeavour is to examine the collective memory effect on cross-border cooperation practices in Europe and more precisely to figure out to what extent subconscious collective memories influence formal planning decisions in general as well as the quality and success of cross-border cooperation processes in particular. However, rather than searching for the cultural nucleus of cross-border planning practice throughout Europe, I want to look at the example of two concrete cross-border regions to understand how proper trans-cultural understanding can be build up. I am assuming that if this aspect is neglected, this may inadvertently legitimise the stereotypes we hold of ‘the others’ but also vice versa and as a consequence hampers cross-border cooperation in practice.