Regional governance is a dynamic and evolving process shaped by various institutional contexts. To facilitate a process-oriented understanding of city-region development, this study draws on soft space literature and focuses on understanding how soft space develops against territorial-bounded governance logics. Specifically, we examine city-region making through the lens of the development of soft space, and conceptualise such development as driven by the interplay between relational, territorial and scalar geopolitics drivers. Through the empirical case of Shenzhen-Shanwei Cooperation Zone, this study reveals the contradictions that arise from layering soft space onto preexisting, territorial-bounded institutional arrangements. We also illustrate how soft space develops under the strong administrative interventions aimed at resolving the conflicts, ultimately becoming largely absorbed into existing institutional frameworks while being strategically retained to safeguard the developmental rights of less-developed areas. In doing so, this study deepens the understanding of the dynamics of city-region making and soft space development under the influences of strong administrative interventions and territorial-bounded governance structures.
AllenJCochraneA (2010) Assemblages of state power: Topological shifts in the organization of government and politics. Antipode42(5): 1071–1089.
2.
AllmendingerPChillaTSielkerF (2014) Europeanizing territoriality – Towards soft spaces?Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space46(11): 2703–2717.
3.
AllmendingerPHaughtonGKnielingJ, et al (eds) (2015) Soft Spaces in Europe: Re-Negotiating Governance, Boundaries and Borders. Oxon and New York: Routledge.
4.
BelGWarnerME (2016) Factors explaining inter-municipal cooperation in service delivery: A meta-regression analysis. Journal of Economic Policy Reform19(2): 91–115.
5.
ChienSSGordonI (2008) Territorial competition in China and the West. Regional Studies42(1): 31–49.
6.
FosterKABarnesWR (2012) Reframing regional governance for research and practice. Urban Affairs Review48(2): 272–283.
7.
FrickeCGualiniE (2018) Metropolitan regions as contested spaces: The discursive construction of metropolitan space in comparative perspective. Territory, Politics, Governance6(2): 199–221.
8.
GoodwinMJonesMJonesR (2005) Devolution, constitutional change and economic development: Explaining and understanding the new institutional geographies of the British state. Regional Studies39(4): 421–436.
9.
HarrisonJ (2008) Stating the production of scales: Centrally orchestrated regionalism, regionally orchestrated centralism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32(4): 922–941.
10.
HarrisonJGroweA (2014) When regions collide: In what sense a new ‘regional problem’?Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space46(10): 2332–2352.
11.
HarrisonJSmithDPKintonC (2017) Relational regions ‘in the making’: Institutionalizing new regional geographies of higher education. Regional Studies51(7): 1020–1034.
12.
HaughtonGAllmendingerP (2008) The soft spaces of local economic development. Local Economy23(2): 138–148.
13.
HaughtonGAllmendingerPCounsellD, et al (2010) The New Spatial Planning: Territorial Management with Soft Spaces and Fuzzy Boundaries. London: Routledge.
14.
HeilmannS (2008) Policy experimentation in China’s economic rise. Studies in Comparative International Development43(1): 1–26.
15.
HerrschelT (2014) Cities, State and Globalisation: City-Regional Governance in Europe and North America. London: Routledge.
16.
HincksSDeasIHaughtonG (2017) Real geographies, real economies and soft spatial imaginaries: Creating a ‘more than Manchester’ region. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research41(4): 642–657.
17.
JonasAE (2012) City-regionalism: Questions of distribution and politics. Progress in Human Geography36(6): 822–829.
18.
JonasAE (2013) City-regionalism as a contingent ‘geopolitics of capitalism’. Geopolitics18(2): 284–298.
19.
JonasAEWardK (2007) There’s more than one way to be ‘serious’ about city-regions. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research31(3): 647–656.
20.
JonesRGoodwinMJonesM, et al (2005) Filling in the state: Economic governance and the evolution of devolution in Wales. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy23(3): 337–360.
21.
LiHZhouLA (2005) Political turnover and economic performance: The incentive role of personnel control in China. Journal of Public Economics89(9–10): 1743–1762.
22.
LiYKoppenjanJVerweijS (2016) Governing environmental conflicts in China: Under what conditions do local governments compromise?Public Administration94(3): 806–822.
23.
LiYWuF (2018) Understanding city-regionalism in China: Regional cooperation in the Yangtze River Delta. Regional Studies52(3): 313–324.
24.
LuSWangH (2023) Regional integration by administrative division adjustment: City–county consolidation and layout of land development in China. Journal of Urban Planning and Development149(3): 04023017.
25.
LuoXShenJ (2008) Why city-region planning does not work well in China: The case of Suzhou–Wuxi–Changzhou. Cities25(4): 207–217.
26.
MacKinnonDShawJ (2010) New state spaces, agency and scale: Devolution and the regionalisation of transport governance in Scotland. Antipode42(5): 1226–1252.
27.
MetzgerJSchmittP (2012) When soft spaces harden: The EU strategy for the Baltic Sea Region. Envir-onment and Planning A: Economy and Space44(2): 263–280.
28.
OlesenK (2011) Soft space planning in cities unbound: Vehicle for effective strategic spatial planning or neoliberal transformations? In: European Urban Research Association 14th international conference: Cities without limits. Available at: https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/58816753/attachment_3_.ashx.pdf (accessed 23 November 2024).
29.
OlesenK (2012) Soft spaces as vehicles for neoliberal transformations of strategic spatial planning?Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy30(5): 910–923.
30.
PhelpsNAAtienzaMAriasM (2015) Encore for the enclave: The changing nature of the industry enclave with illustrations from the mining industry in Chile. Economic Geography91(2): 119–146.
31.
PhelpsNAMiaoJTZhangX (2023) Polycentric urbanization as enclave urbanization: A research agenda with illustrations from the Yangtze River Delta region (YRDR), China. Territory, Politics, Governance11(2): 261–280.
32.
PhelpsNAVallerD (2018) Urban development and the politics of dissonance. Territory, Politics, Governance6(1): 81–103.
33.
PurkarthoferEGranqvistK (2021) Soft spaces as a traveling planning idea: Uncovering the origin and development of an academic concept on the rise. Journal of Planning Literature36(3): 312–327.
34.
PurkarthoferESielkerFSteadD (2022) Soft planning in macro-regions and megaregions: Creating toothless spatial imaginaries or new forces for change?International Planning Studies27(2): 120–138.
35.
RobinsonJ (2016) Thinking cities through elsewhere: Comparative tactics for a more global urban studies. Progress in Human Geography40(1): 3–29.
36.
ShenJ (2007) Scale, state and the city: Urban transformation in post-reform China. Habitat International31(3–4): 303–316.
37.
StaffordI (2023) The rise, fall and resurrection of soft spaces? The regional governance of transport policy in Wales. Regional Studies57(9): 1769–1783.
38.
SteadD (2014) European integration and spatial rescaling in the Baltic region: Soft spaces, soft planning and soft security. European Planning Studies22(4): 680–693.
39.
TelleS (2017) Euroregions as soft spaces: Between consolidation and transformation. European Spatial Research and Policy24(2): 93–110.
40.
VallerDPhelpsNARadfordJ (2014) Soft space, hard bargaining: Planning for high-tech growth in ‘Science Vale UK’. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy32(5): 824–842.
WangXZhaoY (2025) The production of extended local territory: Topology and the spatial politics of city-region making in China. Urban Studies62(5): 995–1014.
43.
WeiQYangW (2025) Addressing uneven development through state-steered intercity cooperation? Insights from Shenzhen–Ganzhou cooperation plan-making. Regional Studies59(1): 2377669.
44.
WuF (2016) China’s emergent city-region governance: A new form of state spatial selectivity through state-orchestrated rescaling. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research40(6): 1134–1151.
45.
WuF (2018) Planning centrality, market instruments: Governing Chinese urban transformation under state entrepreneurialism. Urban Studies55(7): 1383–1399.
46.
WuFZhangF (2010) China’s emerging city region governance: Towards a research framework. Progress in Planning73(1): 60–63.
47.
WuFZhangF (2022) Rethinking China’s urban governance: The role of the state in neighbourhoods, cities and regions. Progress in Human Geography46(3): 775–797.
48.
WuFZhangFLiuY (2022) Beyond growth machine politics: Understanding state politics and national political mandates in China’s urban redevelopment. Antipode54(2): 608–628.
49.
XuJYehAG (2013) Interjurisdictional cooperation through bargaining: The case of the Guangzhou–Zhuhai railway in the Pearl River Delta, China. The China Quarterly213: 130–151.
50.
YangMHuB (2022) The impact of city cluster development on the inter-city disparity: Evidence from China. Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies10(1): 2250006.
51.
YehAGOChenZ (2020) From cities to super mega city regions in China in a new wave of urbanisation and economic transition: Issues and challenges. Urban Studies57(3): 636–654.
52.
ZhangFWuFWangW (2023a) City-regional governance under state entrepreneurialism in China. Transactions in Planning and Urban Research2(1): 3–15.
53.
ZhangJWuF (2006) China’s changing economic governance: Administrative annexation and the reorganization of local governments in the Yangtze River Delta. Regional Studies40(1): 3–21.
54.
ZhangXShenJGaoX (2021) Towards a comprehensive understanding of intercity cooperation in China’s city-regionalization: A comparative study of Shenzhen-Hong Kong and Guangzhou-Foshan city groups. Land Use Policy103: 105339.
55.
ZhangXShenJSunY, et al (2023b) Formation of city regions from bottom-up initiatives: Investigating coalitional developmentalism in the Pearl River Delta. Annals of the American Association of Geographers113(3): 700–716.
56.
ZimmerbauerKPaasiA (2020) Hard work with soft spaces (and vice versa): Problematizing the transforming planning spaces. European Planning Studies28(4): 771–789.
