The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Space, scale and state strategy: rethinking urban and regional governance
Abstract
The last decade has seen a proliferation of theoretical approaches, which have sought to uncover the changing form and governance of cities and regions following the dissolution of the Fordist ‘sociospatial fix’. This article provides a critical review of some of the more influential of these debates that have sought to analyse: the central–local relations of government; the growing influence of ‘regimes’ and ‘growth coalitions’ in energizing urban economies; and the rise of the ‘learning’ or ‘institutionally thick’ region. The authors argue that, although providing valuable insights, these theories suffer from: 1) a failure to integrate analytically into their inquiries a relational account of the state, and thereby to neglect the state's influence in actively shaping the urban and regional fabric; and 2) a similar failure to problematize the issue of scale, often taking for granted the spatial context of their own particular inquiry. Thus, terms like urban regimes, urban coalitions and learning regions are deployed as if they were ontological and epistemological givens. Drawing on neo-Gramscian state theory and recent work on the ‘politics of scale’, this article seeks to open up urban and regional research towards a multiscaled analysis, and to consider political economic activity as a series of situated, context-specific and politically constructed processes. These arguments are then briefly deployed to demonstrate the multifarious and multiscalar changes that characterize London's governance in the late 1990s.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Theorizing Sociospatial Relations
Jessop, B., Brenner, N., & Jones, M. (2008) · Environment and Planning D: Society and Space · doi:10.1068/d9107 · Cited by 1,252
The State, Land System, and Land Development Processes in Contemporary China
Lin, G. C. S., & Ho, S. P. S. (2005) · Annals of the Association of American Geographers · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.2005.00467.x · Cited by 608
Christopher Brown, J., & Purcell, M. (2005) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2004.09.001 · Cited by 470
Metadata
- Authors
- Macleod, G., & Goodwin, M.
- Venue
- Progress in Human Geography
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 503-527
- ISSN
- 0309-1325 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-0288
- OpenAlex
- W2134215628
- Cited by
- 541
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 127.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Space, scale and state strategy: rethinking urban and regional governance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1191/030913299669861026
- The paper
- Macleod, G., & Goodwin, M. (1999). Space, scale and state strategy: rethinking urban and regional governance. Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1191/030913299669861026
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.