<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Territorial governance and dynamic connectivity

Tadjine-Dahmoune Rhadia

► To cite this version:

Tadjine-Dahmoune Rhadia. Territorial governance and dynamic connectivity. International Journal of Economic Performance -, ,2022 5 (2). hal-03904954

HAL Id: hal-03904954

https://hal.science/hal-03904954

Submitted on 13 Feb 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

Territorial governance and dynamic connectivity

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

TADJINE-DAHMOUNE Rhadia

rhadia.dahmoune@ummto.dz

University of Tizi Ouzou, Algeria

Submitted:24/09/2022

Accepted:07/10/2022

Published:04/12/2022

**Abstract:**

This article objective is to identify the concept of governance applied to territorial dynamics. This is to emphasize the role of public and private actors in territorial governance. However, this notion is a form of territorial regulation and dynamic interdependence between particularly productive agents and institutions which will be the privileged actors for any form of coordination, decision-making, coalition and negotiation. Territorial governance is deployed taking into account the increased role of these actors when it comes to getting involved in a decision-making process and that of action.

In the first place, it is a question of defining the territory in a vision of economic development by highlighting, first, its methodological evolution then, by fixing its aspect of specific construct, to highlight the role of governance as game of actors for the benefit of development.

It is then necessary to apprehend the territorial dynamics by the reading grid of coordination and resources. However, the concept of territory is recognized as an actor in its own right and thus gives space a particular dimension in the production process. It is an organized and dynamic system. He succeeds in transforming public policies into public actions through his coordination actions.

**Keywords:** regulation, governance, territory, development, coordination, proximity.

JEL Classification Codes : O01,O02,Q01,R11,R58.
**Introduction**

The concept of territorial or local governance is a form of territorial regulation and dynamic interdependence between particularly productive agents and local institutions. The territory participates in lowering transaction costs between firms and thus becomes a relevant level of coordination of collective actions. That said, non-economic institutions will be the privileged actors for any form of coordination, decision-making, coalition and negotiation (LELOUP F, MOYART L, PECQUEUR B, 2005). Territorial governance is deployed with the consideration of increasing the role of both public and private actors when it comes to getting involved in a decision-making process and that of action by dealing with the different levels of power.

This contribution will focus on dealing with territorial governance applied to territorial dynamics

The first section will define the territory in a vision of economic development by highlighting, first, its methodological evolution then, by fixing its aspect of specific construct, to highlight the role of governance as a game of actors for the benefit of development. However, the analytical tool is the notion of geographical proximity of the relationship between the local and the global. The latter is nourished by the theory of globalization which generates this dynamic.

It is then necessary to apprehend in the second section, the territorial dynamics by the reading grid of coordination and resources. However, the concept of territory has undergone a paradigm shift since it is recognized as an actor in its own right and thus gives space a particular dimension in the production process. It is an organized and dynamic system. He succeeds in transforming public policies into public actions through his coordination actions

# 1. Territorial governance at the service of development

It is necessary, in order to fully understand the change in development paradigm, putting the territory at the heart of the economy, to affirm that it is the various crises of capitalism that have prompted reflections on a new way of considering development.

The internationalization of the economy, the changes in societies which are its corollary, the search for new modes of organization and territorial management give a particular intensity to the reflection on the challenge of the territories. Are they not vectors on which communities must now rely to better establish their well-being?

The paradigms of territorial development appear as an alternative, capable of generating a new dynamic of development, and thus constitute a factor to limit the significance of a highly centralized regulation. The world contemporary mutations are accompanied by a transformation of the role of the State and the emergence of territorial actors capable of implementing a territorial project.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>
**1.1. Territory, a methodological notion**

The use of the concept of territory is a methodological evolution thus giving more
social and societal thickness to the space. Given the various publications that deal with
territory, we can retain the main dimensions that are favored to fully understand what
the concept of territory is based on: The front door, which is based on the social space
component, seems to be a break with to the spatial reference which is a major
constituent element in the definition of geographical space. Social space refers to the
process of occupying, organizing, managing, producing and reproducing space.
Spatialization is a socialization that testifies to an economic, ideological and political
appropriation of space by social groups. The second explanatory component of the
concept of territory relates to the lived and perceived space, which refers to the forms of
representation, perception and the societal dimension invested with social and cultural
meanings, developed by A. Frémont (1976) in his book "the Region, lived space" by
highlighting the imaginary and affective dimension that each individual creates for
himself from his environment, to shape the collective image that produces the territory.

**1.2. The territory, a specific construct**

The territory refers to an economic, ideological and political appropriation of space by human groups who give themselves a particular virtual image of themselves, of their history, of their specificity. The territory is an affective and cultural investment that societies install in their living space. The territory is learned, defended, produced and reproduced. It is a place of identity anchorage. It is also a symbolic phenomenon because the social territory is built in the imagination of each of us.

Several authors Raffestin, Le Berre M, Brunet R, agree to define the territory as a
construct covering both an objective and subjective dimension. And, is as such
comparable to the geographical space which, for André Dauphiné is a “concept
developed to scientifically formalize the characteristics of the terrestrial space”; a space
that results from a process of “spatialization” leading society to enhance it, transform it,
ensure its reproduction and build it as a social construct.

One of the most recognized definitions of territory, that it is a production from space (Raffestin.C, 1980) involving logics of power and domination; an essential label of the State which develops and controls the space. This proactive action guarantees the specificity and the durability, the reproduction of the human groups which are located there (Di Méo. G, 1998).

Thus, we can affirm that territorial development can only be a "specific" model, a
concept dear to B. Pequeur, based mainly on the dynamics of "specification" of own
resources by different actors constituted in "territory". It thus renews all the notions of
development known up to now. This new model takes into account the notion of
proximity to explain the coordination of actors.
Public action becomes essential since it goes beyond the action of the State. And the latter, if he is able to act, sets the condition for the expression of territorialized public action. That said, the model requires appropriate public action, especially since with globalization, the model may have difficulty in its ability to apply in places dominated by generic production, with no obvious possibility of specifying resources.

Territorial governance is an alternative response to these organizational changes by integrating economic and social challenges, whether institutionalized or tacit. The multiplication of actors also allows this thanks to the preservation of the dynamics and flexibilities called into question in the institutional mechanisms.

The construction of the territory is mainly based on a geographical proximity which marks a specific space. That said, the cohesion and development of this territory necessarily implies the installation of a structure guided by organizational proximity. However, what promotes the sustainability and regulation of this organization is territorial governance. Concerning the coherence between the different territorial scales, the adaptations are made by institutional proximity, producing distinct standards.

## 2. Territorial dynamics

It is a question of apprehending the territorial dynamics by explaining the role of the territory as an organized and dynamic system in the coordination of the actors leading to a system of governance.

### 2.1. The territory, an organized system

The territory is a concept which in itself presents the economic dimensions and which succinctly is:

- a system of localized "technological" externalities, that is to say, a set of factors (material and immaterial) which generate a competitive advantage for companies and which, thanks to the proximity and the reduction of transaction costs that they include, can also become "heritage externalities" (cities, districts, centers, clusters, etc.).

- a system of economic and social relations which contribute to the constitution of the relational capital or the social capital of a certain geographical space; this system responsible for local synergy effects and increasing returns, facilitates "collective action" of private actors seeking to produce public goods in a cooperative manner, while contributing to the reduction of uncertainty and the triggering of collective processes of development learning - effects synthesized in the concept of innovative environment (CAMAGNI1992);

- A local system of governance that brings together a community, a group of private actors and a system of local public administrations. This system is responsible for interpreting the needs of communities and implementing the best mechanisms to determine effective responses to the challenges of the general context.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>
## 2.2. The territory, a dynamic system

Reflections on the definition of territorial dynamics is not new, as shown by the literature devoted to clusters, innovative environments, geographical economy, proximities, learning regions, territorialized production systems, heritage and social capital. ... it is worth noting a kind of "paradigmatic mutation" which is illustrated by the fact that interest is directed towards understanding the micro-economic and institutional foundations which are at the source of spatial dynamics and not towards the development of resource allocations in space.

The work notes an increasingly marked openness to organizational approaches, in particular to network theories. However, the social dimensions and historical irreversibility mark the institutionalist anchoring of the authors working on this concept of territorial dynamics. That said, it is important to note the predominance of territory-actor approaches, which are more normative.

The territory is the bearer of a community of interests. It is an object of spatial analysis of a collective nature around which multidisciplinarity is built (LAURENT, 2005). But this observation is a source of limitations, including that of separating organizations and institutions in the analysis, making the search for the origin of the dynamics difficult to carry out. This is why it is suggested that territorial dynamics are primarily explained by inter-individual interaction, instead of being by the couple formed by individuals and institutions.

Proximity dynamics play an important role in the analysis of territorial dynamics. This approach appears as the expression of an “instrumental dominance” allowing in particular designing a multitude of development choices. Also it stipulates to deduce the territorial dynamics of the coordination of individuals and not to predict them.

## 2.3. Territorial dynamics, coordination, resources.

A certain number of ideas bring together most of the approaches seen above, concerning the definition of territorial dynamics, which are to apprehend them through the reading grid of coordination and resources.

However, territorial dynamics can be defined through the interaction of two concepts: coordination and its repercussions at the territorial level, the resources built on a territory. Looping relationships appear between these resource building processes and coordination. Territorial dynamics can therefore be explained as follows:

* The territorial dynamic is based on the interaction of actors. This interaction is a process of bringing together actors who use a system of rules for this purpose.

* Resources are appropriated by the actors within the coordination. They can be of different nature: generic and specific according to an evolutionary terminology, but also latent and available according to the distinction of HIRSCHMAN (1958).

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>
* Resources are created and transformed during coordination. The definition of coordination is variable and depends on the initial theoretical positions of the authors.

* Territories can be apprehended through this interaction between coordination and resources. However, these are not closed systems. Indeed, exogenous phenomena such as globalization and financialization, national economic policies have repercussions on territorial dynamics. As a result, territorial dynamics are multifaceted; there is no single model of territorialized development.

### 2.3.1. The coordination.

To define coordination, it is a question of answering the following question: who coordinates with whom, how and why? Individuals come into contact with other individuals through the performance of joint activities. To this end, they use factors of production in the broad sense (capital, labor, knowledge, information, technologies, etc.). They can rely on several organizational forms or create new ones; their goal is the creation of resources.

Analyzing the coordination of actors from view of territorial governance stipulates that the latter is understood as a set of processes and mechanisms by which different categories of stakeholders or actors (productive, associations, individuals, representatives of public institutions, etc., negotiate the deployment of joint projects for the future development of the territories (Polge E. & Torre A.)

Regarding territorial dynamics, coordination was approached through two reading grids: proximity and governance.

#### 2.3.1.1. Proximities

The reading grid is based on a distinction between three forms of proximity (institutional, organizational and geographic). Another more recent reading grid is presented above. It only distinguishes two forms of proximity: geographical and organized. To date, this reading grid seems to predominate, sometimes accompanied by new forms of proximity (cultural, cognitive, technological, and circulatory). These shapes are used to describe the quality of coordination. Depending on the predominant forms of proximity, the nature of coordination is variable. It is then possible to distinguish archetypes of coordination which then have differentiated repercussions on territorial dynamics.

#### 2.3.1.2. The governance

Coordination is not a mechanical and impersonal relationship. It involves the interplay of actors with different statuses and interests. The difficulty, in the field of observation, as in that of public action, is to identify the common interest of a few and to see if it is compatible with the general interest. The risks of social "dropouts" are real. Two types of conditions can be mentioned: governance, as a mode of articulating private and public issues, appears easier when the games of actors are well identified,
and governance as a mode of integration of individual and institutional logics, is all the
easier if there is a project, if an environment supports it.

2.3.2. The question of resources

Being a source of differentiation and competitiveness of the territory, the resources mobilized during many territorial development projects constitute essential elements for understanding and characterizing the interactions of the actors. (Debuisson M)

At the level of resources, a double distinction relates to the generic – specific, latent –
available pairs.

2.3.2.1. The generic and specific nature

The resources used have an effect on coordination. The generic or specific nature of
the factors of production influences the progress as well as the forms taken by the
coordination. The use of a generic factor only exerts an influence on coordination,
whereas the use of a specific factor provokes modifications, in particular through forms
of learning resulting in the constitution of routines and irreversibilities.

2.3.2.2. The latent and available nature

Another distinction is based on the available or latent nature of the resources. This
distinction differentiates:

- The available resources - understood in the sense of being able to be bought and sold on a market -, directly usable. They are characterized by quantity, price and quality. What matters is resource endowment. It makes it possible to assess development potential through the orientation of development trajectories.

- Latent resources are not immediately available - in the sense of being subject to buy/sell relationships on a market. These latent resources act as a catalyst for economic dynamics, transposable to territorial dynamics.

One explanation of territorial dynamics lies in the capacity of territorialized
coordinations to identify, reveal and use latent resources. This capacity is clearly
defined as a process of a collective nature.

Conclusion

The territory is a local system of governance that brings together a community, a set of private actors and a system of local public administrations. This system is responsible for interpreting the needs of communities and implementing the best mechanisms to determine effective responses to the challenges of the general context.

Governance as treated in this modest paper is a regulatory process whose challenge
is the coordination of actors and the appropriation of resources, the ultimate goal being
territorial construction. This coordination generates the transformation of generic
resources into specific resources. It relies on various actors and is based on geographical, institutional and organizational proximity.

The territory is a constructed and dynamic organized system. But it is clear that the reflection is not exhausted on the collaborative design and that of the organizations of actors and their territorial configurations.

## Referrals and references:

- Bernard Billaudot, 2004, Proximité, réseaux et coordination industrielle: quelle articulation conceptuelle? Quatrièmes Journées de la Proximité, IDEP-LEST-GREQAM, Groupe de Recherche Dynamique de Proximité, Marseille, 17-18 juin 2004, 25 p. halshs-00102655

- Colletis-Wahl K., Peyrache-Gadeau V., Serrate B., 2008. Introduction générale. Les dynamiques territoriales : quelles nouveautés ? *Revue d'Économie Régionale et Urbaine* 2, 147-157. https://doi.org/10.3917/reru.082.0147

- Debuisson M., 2014, Les modes d'interaction pour une dynamique territoriale soutenable : un apport à l'écologie territoriale. Sciences de l'Homme et Société. Université de Technologie de Troyes, Français. ffNNT : 2014TROY0029ff. ftftel-01162416v2f

- Diop, (A), 2016, Le territoire, un nouveau paradigme de développement et intégration sous-régionale, UCAD/GERAD, université de Dakar, in Territoire d'Afrique, pp. 9-18

- Frémont (A.), 1977, La région, espace vécu. In: Norois, n°93, Janvier-Mars 1977. pp. 118-119. www.persee.fr/doc/noroi_0029-182x_1977_num_93_1_3564_t1_0118_0000_2

- Hirschman, A.O. 1958. The Strategy of Economic Development. Yale University Press, http://mzhe-ks.net/en/economic-development-and-european-integration

- LELOUP F, MOYART L, PECQUEUR B, 2005, « La gouvernance territoriale comme nouveau mode de coordination territoriale ? » in géographie, économie, société, Vol.7, pp 321-332

- Moine (A.), 2006, Le territoire comme un système complexe : un concept opératoire pour l'aménagement et la géographie, l'Espace Géographique, Tome 35, thema.univ-fcomte.fr/theoq/pdf/2005/TQ2005%20ARTICLE%2017.pdf

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
- Pecqueur B., Zimmerman J.-B., 2004, Les fondements d'une économie de proximités, in Pecqueur B., Zimmerman J.-B., *Économie de proximités*, Éditions Lavoisier, Paris.

- Etienne Polge, André Torre, 2017, Territorial governance and proximity dynamics. The case of two public policy arrangements in the Brazilian Amazon, UMR SAD-APT, INRA - AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, 16, rue Claude Bernard, 75231 Paris Cedex 05, France

- Workshop organisé à l'Université de Savoie en mars 2006 intitulé « Les dynamiques territoriales, quelles nouveautés ? », p1.