Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2016-12
When administrative reforms produce territorial differentiation. How market-oriented policies transform military brownfield reconversion in France (1989–2012)
The article explores the territorial dimension of the reforms that remould state administrations, which is overlooked by both public sector and territorial politics literatures. It is based on a fine-grained case study of how the emergence of an administrative reform aimed at strengthening market coordination in the management and sale of public real estate in France has affected previously existing forms of military real estate management that relied on central and local political bargaining. While existing literature argues that market-oriented administrative reforms tend to side-line political regulation, this reform entails a differentiation rather than a replacement of the operating codes of the state in territories. Indeed, policy change through layering causes the consolidation of different land regimes, a planning-oriented one and a market-oriented one, that apply differentially in territories and leave the local governments with uneven rooms of manoeuvre for political negotiation.
AllmendingerPHaughtonG (2010) Spatial planning, devolution, and new planning spaces. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy28(5): 803–818.
2.
ArtioliF (2014) L’armée, les villes, l’État. Restructurations militaires et politiques urbaines: les transformations de l’intégration territoriale en France et en Italie, PhD Thesis, Sciences Po Paris, France.
3.
BartoliniS (2005) Restructuring Europe: Centre Formation, System Building and Political Structuring Between the Nation-state and the European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4.
Bezès P (2009) Réinventer l’État. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
5.
BrennerN (2004) New State Spaces: Urban Governance and the Rescaling of Statehood, USA, Oxford New York: Oxford University Press.
6.
BrunetièreJ-R (2006) Les indicateurs de la loi organique relative aux lois de finances (LOLF): une occasion de débat démocratique?Revue française d’administration publique117(1): 95–111.
7.
Chinouilh J-L (2011) Restructurations militaires: avenir des emprises aliénées. Revue Géographique de l’Est 51(1–2). Available at: http://rge.revues.org/3229.
8.
ColeA (2012) The French State and its territorial challenges. Public Administration90(2): 335–350.
9.
Cour des Comptes (2007) Communication à la commission des finances, de l’économie générale et du plan de l’assemblée nationale. Immobilier du Ministre de la défense, Paris.
10.
Debains O (2003) Mission ‘Immobilier Public’, Premier Ministre, Paris.
11.
Deniaud Y and Dumont J-L (2008) Rapport d’information par la commission des finances, de l’économie générale et du plan en conclusion des travaux de la Mission d’évaluation et de contrôle (MEC) sur les suites données aux préconisations de la Mission d’évaluation et de contrôle sur l’immobilier de l’État, Assemblée Nationale, Paris.
12.
DenteB (2012) The end of an era? The Monti government approach to central-local relations. LIEPP Working Papers. 6, 1–21.
13.
Dubois-MauryJ (1985) Stratégies foncières des forces armées. Les échanges compensés. Etudes foncières. 26, 13–17.
14.
Dubois-MauryJ (1998) Impacts urbains des restructurations de l’appareil militaire en France. Annales de Géographie107(599): 89–97.
15.
EgebergMTrondalJ (2009) Political leadership and bureaucratic autonomy: effects of agencification. Governance22(4): 673–688.
16.
EpsteinR (2013) La rénovation urbaine: Démolition-reconstruction de l’Etat, Paris: Les Presses de Sciences Po.
17.
Guelton S (1998) Dix ans de vente des terrains militaires. Etudes foncières 79: 19–20.
18.
Guelton S (2001) Les communes face à la reconversion des sites militaires. Etudes foncières 93.
19.
HallPA (1993) Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics25(3): 275–296.
20.
HoodC (1991) A public management for all seasons?Public Administration69(1): 3–19.
HowlettM (2009) Process sequencing policy dynamics: beyond homeostasis and path dependency. Journal of Public Policy29(03): 241–262.
23.
HowlettMRaynerJ (2006) Understanding the historical turn in the policy sciences: a critique of stochastic, narrative, path dependency and process-sequencing models of policy-making over time. Policy Sciences39(1): 1–18.
24.
Irondelle B (2008) Les politiques de défense. In: Borraz O and Guirodon V (eds) Politiques publiques 1, La France dans la gouvernance européenne. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, pp. 93–112.
25.
JohnstoneP (2014) Planning reform, rescaling, and the construction of the postpolitical: the case of the planning act (2008) and nuclear power consultation in the UK. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy32(4): 697–713.
26.
KuhlmannS (2010) New public management for the ‘classical continental European administration’: modernization at the local level in Germany, France and Italy. Public Administration88(4): 1116–1130.
27.
LaffinMMawsonJOrmstonC (2014) Public services in a ‘Postdemocratic Age’: An alternative framework to network governance. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy32(4): 762–776.
28.
Le Galès P (2011) Policy instruments and governance. In: Bevir M (ed) The SAGE Handbook of Governance. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
29.
Le GalèsPScottA (2011) A British bureaucratic revolution? Autonomy without control, or ‘Freer Markets, More Rules’. Revue française de sociologie51(5): 117–143.
30.
Le LidecP (2011) La décentralisation, la structure du financement et les jeux de transfert de l’impopularité en France. In: BezèsPSinéA (eds) Gouverner (par) les finances publiques, Paris: Presses de Sciencies Po.
31.
Lodge M and Wegrich K (2012) Executive Politics in Times of Crisis. Basingstoke, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
32.
MannM (1984) The autonomous power of the state: its origins, mechanisms and results. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie25(2): 185–213.
33.
Meillerand M-C (2011) Les terrains militaires comme ressort de l’urbanisation au XXe siècle dans l’agglomération lyonnaise. In Situ. Revue des patrimoines (16). Available at: http://insitu.revues.org/382.
34.
Ministère de la Défense (1998) Répertoire Interarmées des Emprises Défense, La politique immobilière, patrimoniale et domaniale du ministère de la défense, Paris.
35.
Ministère de la défense – Mission pour la Réalisation des Actifs Immobiliers (2010) Rapport d’activités, Paris.
36.
Ministére de la Defense – Mission pour la Réalisation des Actifs Immobiliers (2006) Réussir la reconversion d’un site militaire ou industriel. Issy-les-Moulineaux: ESF.
37.
Perulli P (2010) Politiche locali tra decentralizzazione e ricentralizzazione. Stato e mercato 3.
38.
PiersonP (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review94(2): 251–267.
39.
PollittC (2012) New Perspectives on Public Services: Place and Technology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40.
Pollitt C, Thiel DSV and Homburg DV (eds) (2007) New Public Management in Europe: Adaptation and Alternatives. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
41.
RhodesRAWWrightV (1987) Tensions in the territorial politics of Western Europe. West European Politics10(4): 1–20.
42.
RokkanS (1999) State Formation, Nation-Building and Mass Politics in Europe. The Theory of Stein Rokkan. Edited by Peter Flora, Stein Kuhnle, Derek Urwin, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43.
StreeckWThelenK (2005) Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
44.
Tron G (2005) Rapport d’Information sur la gestion et la cession du patrimoine immobilier de l’Etat et des Etablissements Public, Assemblée Nationale. Commission des Finances, de l’Economie Générale et du Plan, Paris.
45.
Wollmann H (2014) Public services in European countries. Between public/municipal and private sector provision–and reverse? In: Carlos Nunes S and Bucek J (eds) Fiscal Austerity and Innovation in Local Governance in Europe. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., pp. 49–76.
