Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
representations in strategic spatial plans in the three countries have to date not
been significantly affected. For instance, while much rhetoric in spatial policy docu-
ments concentrates on ideas of network space, such as functional interdepen-
dences or relational dynamics, the accompanying 'policy maps' and key diagrams
do not reflect this changing discourse but remain in most cases strictly Cartesian
in representation. In terms of underlying geographical analysis and imaginative use
of symbols, the analysis showed that - with the exception of some Dutch strat-
egies - none of the key diagrams is particularly 'artistic'. There are certain elements
identified in the cartographic illustrations which represent spatial relations or net-
works, but the overall impression is of 'scientific' but rather traditional policy maps
in the German plans, and of generally not very comprehensive or elaborated key
diagrams in the majority of the English RPGs. The Dutch plans show an interesting
ambiguity in this respect, with on the one hand an obvious interest in experimental
and innovative ideas for spatial development (expressed through integrated spatial
connections and concepts), yet on the other hand - at least in some of the plans -
insistence on the (subconscious) belief in the 'objective' and 'unbiased' map by
using remote sensing data and GIS.
In terms of the users of these plans one can assume that the planning instru-
ments in Germany and England are predominantly directed at lower planning tiers
and other sectoral departments, i.e. other professionals, and not necessarily the
wider public. The obvious differences in style can then be explained by the function
of this planning instrument in the system, rather than different user groups.
Whereas the German approach in many respects seems to fulfil its requirements
by providing a 'scientific' and therefore 'trustworthy' representation, a certain stan-
dardisation and hence planning certainty for lower levels, the cartographic
representations in English key diagrams seem somewhat less well prepared for
their role. The flexibility and discretion in the English planning system, and the
strong emphasis on communication and consensual planning, would ideally find
their visual expression in an indicative and somewhat fuzzy representation, but one
which is nevertheless attractive and convincing. That the RPGs under study seem
to fall short in this respect can be explained through the relatively new requirement
of preparing strategic regional plans in England, and possibly also through the
notable absence of mapping and visualisation in planning education. In this
respect, English planners could learn much from other countries about the
'mapping' of spatial policies. Although indicative in nature, Dutch plans are clearly
directed at the wider public, besides a professional audience, and are overall pre-
sented in a highly attractive and professional format, which ensures their support.
