Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
planning tradition's viewpoint to a transnational planning process is inevitable. It is
for this reason that the involvement of a more neutral actor could be beneficial in
such a process, i.e. a 'third party' which can maintain an overview of the planning
process and the cartographic representation of spatial policy, and that can intro-
duce a more 'European' perspective to the process to even out national biases.
Many planners do not have much experience with the 'mapping' aspect of
planning practice, and certainly not with the production of these powerful planning
tools. Lussault and Forester have both highlighted the potential for distortion in
communication on the basis of what they called
l'enonciation déléguée
(Lussault,
1994) or 'legitimate division of labor' (Forester, 1989). In most planning traditions
the cartographic aspects are dealt with in another department than the preparation
of planning policy text. Besides this lack of experience with the cartographic lan-
guage by many spatial planners, there is also an institutional component that
hinders the effective use of cartographic representations in transnational spatial
planning. This relates to the differences in approaches to mapping, the rational-
scientific epistemology of which has until recently not been openly discussed in
most EU member states. The graphic language of these 'rational-scientific'
representations has been perfected over the years and supported by standardisa-
tion of content and graphic symbols as well as the use of tools such as GIS soft-
ware. The analysis of the form and style of cartographic representations in the
German planning system, where the 'maps' communicate a certain reliability and
trustworthiness for lower planning tiers, has demonstrated this rational-scientific
epistemology. To break through these underlying assumptions to raise awareness
that every cartographic representation is a selection and interpretation of reality,
thus that cartography is always subjective, will require much effort. Interest in infor-
mal planning strategies and a more qualitative approach to the cartographic
representation of spatial policy has increased considerably in many EU member
states over recent years (cf. Chapter 3), and this changing understanding in turn
might influence policy processes at transnational levels in due course. The carto-
graphic principles and a cartographic 'language' have yet to be agreed at trans-
national level. How this will be achieved is an important question. There is unlikely
to be a standardisation of visual languages at EU level, given the limited compe-
tences for spatial planning. In order to support cross-national visual communica-
tion, the setting up of interdisciplinary teams with different expertise and skills,
such as graphic designers, cartographers or artists in the process of preparing
policy maps for a transnational territory could therefore prove beneficial.
Related to the difficulty of agreeing on spatial policy 'maps' in many of the
recent transnational planning processes is the generally broadening scope of the
understanding of 'spatial planning' in Europe. In the current Cartesian understand-
ing of 'planning cartography', the spatial impacts of many of the policy issues that
