An analytical framework for democratic metropolitan governance

Introduction Continued urban sprawl combined with slowed-down or failed attempts of local government reform has resulted in a growing divergence between functional and institutional urban spaces in most industrialised countries. Today, cities in the (weberian) sense of territorially integrated socioeconomic entities no longer exist. The urban phenomenon is better described by the notion of metropolitan areas, that is multi-centred urban regions which develop mainly along functional networks, cutting across institutionally defined terrotorial boundaries. This situation of governmental fragmentation leads to difficulties for the solving of public problems in these areas. On the general background of the long-running debate on the adequate institutional structure to govern fragmented metropolitan areas, this paper aims to reflect upon the relationship between the architecture of metropolitan governance on the one hand, and metropolitan democracy and citizenship on the other hand. More precisely, the paper consists in three parts: It starts with considering aspects of democracy and citizenship in the classic debate on metropolitan governance which has been basically stimulated by two different intellectual traditions: the metropolitan reform tradition and the public choice approach. In the second part we try to elaborate the essential aspects 3 of what can be called 'new metropolitan governance', as related to the ongoing discussion on " modern governance " (or new forms and modes of political steering through bargaining systems). Equally, we address possible implications of 'new metropolitan governance' for the widely discussed " democratic dilemma " (between " system effectiveness vs. citizen participation ") and for the relationships between (civil) society and the state. In the last part, we outline the main elements of an analytical framework with which issues of democracy and citizenship related to metropolitan governance can be addressed by focusing on different segments of interest intermediation involved in metropolitan governance. At the same time, we identify conditioning factors which need to be taken into account when comparing metropolitan governance arrangements across countries, sites or policy fields. 1. Metropolitan governance and democracy: traditional views a) The classic debate on metropolitan governance Since the suburbanisation boom after World War II, the nature of metropolitan governance has been a continuous hot topic in regional economics, public administration research and urban political science. Generations of scholars have debated over the 'right way' to overcome the growing disparities between functional urban territories and the institutional structure of local government. This long-running debate on metropolitan governance – which is, by the way, …