Exploring metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region Roger Barres Urban Studies: Master’s (Two-Year) Thesis Tutor: Peter Parker Spring Semester 2021 Exploring metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region Roger Barres Urban Studies: Master’s (Two-Year) Thesis Tutor: Peter Parker Spring Semester 2021 Summary and information For the first time in history, more people in the world live in urban areas than in rural areas. Almost half of this world urban population now live in metropolitan areas, which are becoming central spaces of world economic and social activity, and where major global challenges happen and should be tackled. Metropolitan areas are defined by urban spaces of integrated mobility flows and markets, but also by high institutional fragmentation and political decomposition. This fragmentation interferes in decision-making processes leading to difficulties for the design and implementation of adequate responses to metropolitan problems. In this context, the study of how metropolitan areas should be governed is gaining relevance in the field of urban studies, among other fields. The normative debates about metropolitan governance has been framed by three traditions. From the 60s to the late 80s these debates were restricted to the ‘old regionalism’ dialectics between the metropolitan reform and public choice scholars. More recently, new regionalism recognize in flexible and cooperative governance instruments the most effective way to deal with metropolitan problems. From this perspective metropolitan areas are governed by complex governance relations between diverse actors through multiple and concurrent instruments, in the form of policy networks, voluntary cooperation, strategic planning, and so on. The Öresund Region is a metropolis that spans from eastern Denmark to southern Sweden, and includes cities such as Copenhagen and Malmö. While it has been largely referenced and praised as an example of cross-border metropolitan area, there is little evidence on how it is governed or which are the main governance instruments or who are the actors involved in the policy-making process. Taking an original approach to the study of metropolitan governance, this paper represents a first attempt to identify and understand the main features of metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region as a system, in a polycentric and multilayered cross- border metropolis. The results suggest that metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region is very ambiguous, with several agents acting in different and non-coincident scales, strongly focused in hard policies and development policies in contrast to social and environmental policy areas. Also, there are persistent barriers to cross-border governance despite the favorable context. And finally, there is a relevant democratic governance deficit, in terms of social actors’ participation and involvement in the metropolitan decision-making process. These first results recommend to go forward with further research in this issue. Particularly to grasp about governance networks operatives, policy-making processes, and citizens’ political orientations to, ultimately, propose improvements for a more effective, comprehensive and democratic governance in the Öresund metropolitan region. Key words: metropolitan area, city-region, metropolitan governance, urban politics, cross-border metropolitan region, democratic governance, Öresund region 1 Table of Content Summary and information 1 Introduction, aim and problem 3 Theory and method 5 Metropolitan governance: schools of thought 5 Cross-border metropolitan governance 7 Method 8 Defining and delimiting metropolitan areas: the Öresund Region 12 The OECD definition of functional urban areas 13 Eurostat and national statistical agencies definitions: SCB and DST 14 Contrasting definitions 16 The Öresund Region as a cross-border metropolitan region 18 Metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region 26 Metropolitan governments in the Öresund Region 26 Metropolitan agencies in the Öresund Region 27 Vertical coordination in the Öresund Region 32 Voluntary cooperation in the Öresund Region 33 The Öresund’s metropolitan governance ‘system’: features and deficits 37 Conclusions and discussion 44 References 46 Appendices 52 Appendix A 52 Appendix B 55 Appendix C 57 2 Introduction, aim and problem Current research in the field of urban studies very frequently starts with a similar claim: world population is more urban than ever; or the process of urbanization in the world is steadily growing. Nowadays, a majority of the world population is already living in urban areas. In 2030 it is predicted that the urban population will rise up to 60%. And, by 2050, 75% of the world population will be urban (UCLG, 2016; UN, 2018; UN Habitat, 2017). Among the urban population, 41% is currently living in city-regions or metropolitan areas. Metropolitan regions are urban areas defined by socioeconomic flows and political fragmentation, in which a core city and its hinterlands are connected by some functional tie, in terms of commuting flows, labor markets, etc. They have become spaces in which central social and economic activities are constructed (Rodríguez-Pose, 2008) and are gaining relevance as spaces in which major global challenge–social, economic and environmental– should be tackled (Glaeser, 2011; Tomàs, 2016). Taking into account the increasing centrality of metropolitan regions, they have become a very relevant topic for the academia, urban elites and policy circles. Specifically, whereas the challenges posed by the metropolitan phenomena are diverse, the debate on how they should be governed is gaining relevance in the field of urban studies (Heinelt & Kübler, 2005; Purcell, 2007; Savitch & Vogel, 2009). The relevance of this studies is rooted in the fact that metropolitan regions are, by definition, fragmented spaces. Metropolization is characterized by processes of urbanization cutting across defined institutional and territorial boundaries, either local, regional or national boundaries. There is a divergence between the functional urban area that forms the metropolitan region and the several diverse public institutions that operate in this area. This institutional fragmentation and political decomposition ultimately interfere in the decision- and policy-making processes (Le Galès, 1998; Heinelt & Kübler, 2005), in simple words: “governmental fragmentation leads to difficulties regarding the formulation and implementation of adequate policy responses to metropolitan problems (Kübler & Schwab, 2007, p. 473). The Öresund Region, also known as Greater Copenhagen, has been widely referenced and publicized as one most innovative and dynamic metropolitan regions in Europe (Hospers, 2006; Nauwelaers et al., 2013; OECD, 2015). In fact, it has been identified as a metropolitan region in terms of clustered economies, research and education, housing market or even culture and identity (Lund Hansen, et al., 2001; Greve & Rydbjerg, 2003; Garlick et al., 2006; Lögfren; O'Dell et al., 2011). The construction of the Öresund bridge in 2000 represented a breaking point in the social, cultural and economic integration of the Danish and Swedish shores (Wichmann Matthiessen, 2004; Lögrofren, 2008; O’Dell et al., 2011; Nauwelaers et al., 2013). Since then, the metropolitan region is generally considered to include the urban area of Copenhagen and the areas of Malmö and Lund in Sweden and has been generally publicized as a best-practice of cross-border integration (Nauwelaers et al., 2013). Having said that, the Öresund Region is still an ambiguous concept. In territorial terms it is generally accepted that includes the capital city of Copenhagen and its suburbs and 3 spans until the urban area of Malmö and Lund, in the southern part of Sweden. But there is still no clear definition of its limits and the communities included in. In parallel, and more important to this research, despite its recognition there is an important lack of knowledge and understanding about its governance model. Particularly; which actors are involved and which excluded in the policy-making and decision-making process in this Region? Which policy areas, if any, are designed and implemented at the metropolitan scale? And ultimately, there is something such a metropolitan Öresund Region and how it is politically constructed? The aim of this research is to provide an initial and, to my knowledge, first-time exploration of the governance system in the Öresund metropolitan region. In addition, I will take a special look into the democratic governance in the Öresund Region. Whereas research on metropolitan governance has traditionally focused in the most effective and efficient ways of organizing metropolitan areas, several authors have recently noted the necessity to look at the democratic legitimacy and performance of metropolitan arrangements (Hamilton, 2004; Heinelt & Kübler, 2005; Purcell, 2007; Kübler, 2012; Zimmermann, 2014). In this sense, the study of metropolitan governance, and particularly in fragamented cross-border urban areas, might be relevant in order to understand the broader democratic sources and performance in urban development. The structure of the thesis is as follows. In the first section I will present the most relevant theoretical approaches to metropolitan governance, their focus of study and their normative goals. Finally, I will present my methodological approach to the study of metropolitan governance in the Öresund Region. Second, I will discuss the definition and delimitation of metropolitan