Métropolisation et résistance des territoires : l’exemple luxembourgeois.

The emergence and assertiveness of world-class cities tend to transform - at local levels - the shapes of institutional organizations that are in place. Indeed, new management territories for metropolitan areas provide an answer to the local populations increasing demands and also a reaction to comp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Antoine Decoville
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Université de Reims Champagne-Ardennes
Series:L'Espace Politique
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.openedition.org/espacepolitique/694
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The emergence and assertiveness of world-class cities tend to transform - at local levels - the shapes of institutional organizations that are in place. Indeed, new management territories for metropolitan areas provide an answer to the local populations increasing demands and also a reaction to competitions between world-class cities, whether those territories are the results of a voluntary cooperation between municipalities or whether they come from States projects. In this global context of institutional change, the example of Luxembourg appears to be quite exceptional, and could even represent a model of stability. Through the study of the links between central and local authorities, and through the description of relationships between business elites and political leaders, this article attempts to analyze the stability which can be observed in the political organization in Luxembourg. This stability has to been interpreted as a proof of the effectiveness of the governance in place. Indeed, a change in an institutional organization has to be interpreted as an answer to a crisis situation. More than a simple case study, the example of Luxembourg represents a laboratory for the analysis of State and communal resistance in a world-class cities’ globalized economy, which generally leads to decentralization and cooperation between municipalities. However, Luxembourg remains a very specific example for several reasons. It is a very small country, with only 2 586 square kilometers for 476 000 inhabitants, and just one major city. Moreover, as opposed to other European countries, the institutional distance between political and business leaders is reduced. As a result, the benefits which, in other countries, are generally provided by the emergence of a metropolitan governance can be found in the whole Luxembourg national territory.
ISSN:1958-5500