New relational understandings of city building

Reading the city through dynamic landscapes of spatial governance





In this think piece I will take you on a journey to share my approach to reading contemporary city building, which is increasingly chaotic, fragmented, and complex. Spatial governance, in my understanding, refers to the collective efforts to coordinate and structure the dynamic institutional activities of a variety of actors that aim to organise the built environment. Urban planning is one of these efforts, though not the only one. Therefore, in this article, I will visualise spatial governance as a dynamic landscape which accommodates multi-actor, multi-scalar, multi-loci and multi-temporal regulatory activities related to the uncertainties, opportunities, and crises of the market. Reading dynamic landscapes of spatial governance requires an understanding of regulatory efforts as they refer to the relational behaviour of state, market, and community actors. This approach, to linking regulatory efforts to relational behaviour, in my view, gives us new opportunities to provide comprehensive understandings of how cities develop under market-driven conditions.

How to Cite

Tasan-Kok, T. (2021). New relational understandings of city building: Reading the city through dynamic landscapes of spatial governance. Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning, 5(1), 1–8.







Adams, David and Steve Tiesdell (2010) Planners as market actors: Rethinking state–market relations in land and property. Planning Theory & Practice, 11 (2), pp.187-207. DOI:

Adams, David and Steve Tiesdell (2012) Shaping places: Urban planning, design and development. London: Routledge. DOI:

Allmendinger, Phill and Graham Haughton (2013) The evolution and trajectories of English spatial governance: ‘Neoliberal’ episodes in planning. Planning Practice & Research, 28 (1), pp.6-26. DOI:

Baeten, Guy (2012) Neoliberal planning: Does it really exist? In Taşan-Kok, Tuna and Guy Baeten (eds) Contradictions of Neoliberal Planning. Dordrecht: Springer, pp.205-211. DOI:

Bengs, Christer (2005) Planning theory for the naive. European Journal of Spatial Development-http://www.nordregio. se/EJSD/-ISSN 1650-9544.

Blokland, Talia, Christine Hentschel, Andrzej Holm, Henrik Lebuhn and Talia Margalit (2015) Urban citizenship and right to the city: The fragmentation of claims. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39 (4), pp.655-665. DOI:

Bracci, Enrico, Christopher Humphrey, Jodie Moll and Ileana Steccolini (2015) Public sector accounting, accountability and austerity: More than balancing the books? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 28 (6), pp.878-908. DOI:

Campbell, Heather, Malcolm Tait and Craig Watkins (2013) Is there space for better planning in a neoliberal world? Implications for planning practice and theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 34 (1), pp.45-59. DOI:

Crossley, Nick (2010) Towards relational sociology. London: Routledge. DOI:

Eraydin, Ayda and Tuna Taşan-Kok (2014) State response to contemporary urban movements in Turkey: A critical overview of state entrepreneurialism and authoritarian interventions. Antipode, 46 (1), pp.110-129. https://doi. org/10.1111/anti.12042 DOI:

Fainstein, Suzan (2001) The city builders: Property, politics, and planning in London and New York. Oxford: Blackwell.

Geels, Frank (2005) Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72 (6), pp.681-696. DOI:

Geels, Frank (2020) Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics and neo-institutional theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152, 119894, techfore.2019.119894 DOI:

Harvey, David (1989) From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 71 (1), pp.3-17. DOI:

Healey, Patsy (1997) Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Healey, Patsy (2015) Re-thinking the relations between planning, state and market in unstable times. In Hillier, Jean and Jonathan Metzger (eds) Connections: Exploring Contemporary Planning Theory and Practice with Patsy Healey. London: Ashgate, pp.169-178. DOI:

Janssen-Jansen, Leonie and Menno van der Veen (2016) Contracting communities: Conceptualizing community benefits agreements to improve citizen involvement in urban development projects. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49 (1), pp.205-225. DOI:

Jessop, Bob (1997) The governance of complexity and the complexity of governance: Preliminary remarks on some problems and limits of economic guidance. In Ash, Amin and Jerzy Hausner (eds) Beyond Market and Hierarchy: Interactive Governance and Social Complexity, Edward Elgar, pp.95-128. DOI:

Le Galès, Patrick (1998) Regulations and governance in European cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 22 (3), pp.482-506. DOI:

Mazzucato, Mariana (2015) The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths (Vol. 1). London: Anthem Press.

Mossberger, Karen and Gerry Stoker (2001) The evolution of urban regime theory: The challenge of conceptualization. Urban Affairs Review, 36 (6), pp.810-835. DOI:

Özogul, Sara (2019) Transformative spatial governance: New avenues for comprehensive planning in fragmented urban development. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

Özogul, Sara and Tuna Taşan-Kok (2020) One and the same? A systematic literature review of residential property investor types. Journal of Planning Literature. 35 (4), pp.475-494. DOI:

Pacewicz, Josh (2016) The city as a fiscal derivative: Financialization, urban development, and the politics of earmarking. City & Community, 15 (3), pp.264-288. DOI:

Peck, Jamie, Nick Theodore and Neil Brenner (2009) Neoliberal urbanism: Models, moments, mutations. SAIS Review, XXIX (1), pp.48-66. DOI:

Pessoa, Igor, Tuna Taşan-Kok and Willem Altes (2015) Brazilian urban porosity: Treat or threat? Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Urban Design and Planning, 169 (2), pp.47-55. DOI:

Pierre, Jon (1999) Models of urban governance: The institutional dimension of urban politics. Urban Affairs Review, 34 (3), 372-396. DOI:

Purcell, Mark (2009) Resisting neoliberalization: Communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements? Planning Theory, 8 (2), pp.140-165. DOI:

Raco, Mike (2013) The new contractualism, the privatization of the welfare state, and the barriers to open source planning. Planning Practice & Research, 28 (1), pp.45-64. DOI:

Robinson, Jennifer and Katia Attuyer (2021) Extracting value, London style: Revisiting the role of the state in urban development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 45 (2), pp.303-331. DOI:

Ryan-Collins, Josh (2019) Breaking the housing–finance cycle: Macroeconomic policy reforms for more affordable homes. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 53 (3), pp.480-502. DOI:

Ryan-Collins, Josh, Toby Lloyd and Laurie Macfarlane (2017) Rethinking the economics of land and housing. London: Zed Books Ltd.

Sassen, Saskia (2011) Cities in a world economy. London: Sage Publications.

Scott, Richard (1995) Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oak. Cal: Sage Publications.

Stone, Clarance Nathan (1993) Urban regimes and the capacity to govern: A political economy approach. Journal of Urban Affairs 15 (1), 1-28. DOI:

Swyngedouw, Eric (2005) Governance innovation and the citizen: The Janus face of governance-beyond-the-state. Urban Studies, 42 (11), pp.1991-2006. DOI:

Swyngedouw, Eric (1989) The heart of the place: The resurrection of locality in an age of hyperspace. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 71 (1), pp.31-42. DOI:

Swyngedouw, Eric, Frank Moulaert and Arantxa Rodriguez (2002) Neoliberal urbanization in europe: Large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy. Antipode, 34 (3), pp.542-577. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna (2004) Budapest, Istanbul, and Warsaw: Institutional and spatial change. Eburon Delft.

Taşan-Kok, Tuna (2010) Entrepreneurial governance: Challenges of large-scale property-led urban regeneration projects. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 101 (2), pp.126-149. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna (2015) Analysing path dependence to understand divergence: Investigating hybrid neo-liberal urban transformation processes in Turkey. European Planning Studies, 23 (11), pp.2184-2209. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna, Rob Atkinson and Maria Lucia Refinetti Martins (2018) Hybrid contractual landscapes: Framing public accountability through performance control instruments in urban regeneration. AESOP (Association of European Schools of Planning), Gothenburg, Sweden.

Taşan-Kok, Tuna and Guy Baeten (eds) (2011) Contradictions of neoliberal planning: Cities, policies, and politics (vol. 102). Springer Science & Business Media. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna and Willem Korthals Altes (2012) Rescaling Europe: Effects of single European market regulations on localized networks of governance in land development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36 (6), pp.1268-1287. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna and Sara Özogul (2021) Fragmented governance architectures underlying residential property production in Amsterdam. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna, Sara Özogul and Andre Legarza (2021) After the crisis is before the crisis: Reading property market shifts through Amsterdam’s changing landscape of property investors. European Urban and Regional Studies. DOI:

Taşan-Kok, Tuna, Martijn van den Hurk, Sara Özogul and Sofia Bittencourt (2019) Changing accountability regimes in the governance of Dutch urban regeneration. European Planning Studies, 27 (6), pp.1107-1128. DOI:

Turok, Ivan (1992) Property-led urban regeneration: Panacea or placebo? Environment and Planning A, 24 (3), pp.361-379. DOI:

van Loon, Jannes and Manuel Aalbers (2017) How real estate became ‘just another asset class’: The financialization of the investment strategies of Dutch institutional investors. European Planning Studies, 25 (2), pp.221-240. DOI:

Van Loon, Jannes, Stijn Oosterlynck and Manuel Aalbers (2019) Governing urban development in the Low Countries: From managerialism to entrepreneurialism and financialization. European Urban and Regional Studies, 26 (4), pp.400-418. DOI:

Ward, Kevin (2010) Towards a relational comparative approach to the study of cities. Progress in Human Geography, 34 (4), pp.471-487. DOI:

Weber, Rachel (2002) Extracting value from the city: Neoliberalism and urban redevelopment. Antipode, 34 (3), pp.519-340 DOI: