Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Globalization processes have caused economic development to concentrate in metropolitan regions all over the world. These concentration processes have considerable implications for spatial development within metropolitan regions. The metropolitan region is gradually changing into an extremely heterogeneous archipelago of specialized functional entities, each reflecting different economic and social realities and approaches. While metropolitan cores and selected islands of global importance flourish, a growing number of local governments in metropolitan peripheries are being challenged by the spatial and social implications of demographic decline, changing values and eroding local economies. Local governments must respond to such changes. In a time when public budgets are decreasing, they have to set new priorities. In the absence of investments for local projects, they have to rely on local territorial capital to maintain basic infrastructures for local residents, trades and small businesses. Moreover, depending on the scenic or nature potential, they have to be creative in attracting new investment through seasonal activities, such as weekend recreation, second homes and local tourism. In addition to these circumstances, they are forced to cooperate with neighboring communities to organize a spatially functional division of tasks and jointly lobby the metropolitan government.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klaus R. Kunzmann (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: