Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Articoli scientifici

No. 30 (2025): U3 iQuaderni. Journal of urban studies

Governing by Agreement: French Intermunicipal Cooperation Facing Ecological and Climate Commitments

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/u3q30-2025oa17545
Submitted
marzo 25, 2024
Published
2026-07-20

Abstract

This text describes the evolution of the French planning system (aménagement du territoire), aimed at ensuring homogeneous access to goods and services, as well as addressing biodiversity loss issues. The vertically vetted planning model typical to the civil law system couples with the horizontal subsidiarity of the common law system, based on binding agreements between public entities (the contract model). These aspects largely affect inter-municipal cooperation entities (EPCI), responsible for addressing sustainable development issues in a coordinated and integrated way.

Inter-municipality is a key feature of the aménagement à la française, in tackling the administrative fragmentation inherited from the municipal divisions designed on pre-existing parish districts after the French Revolution. Among the Projets de territoire available to the EPCI, the Schéma de coherence territorial (SCoT) is most performing in providing guidelines and legally binding objectives to be conveyed to local master plans. To achieve coordination among institutions at all involved levels, the SCoTs arrange sector policies in spatial planning and embed green infrastructure devised to counter biodiversity loss and climate change.

Despite the effectiveness of local authorities and the commitment of intermediate bodies bringing relevant competence and administrative management capacity in fulfilling such objectives, current economic conditions and conflict dynamics may hamper the welfare model, directly affecting the sphere of citizens’ rights.

 

References

  1. Bezes Ph. (2009). Reinventer l’Etat. Les réformes de l’administration française (1962-2008). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  2. Boino P., Desjardins X. (2009). Intercommunalité: politique et territoire. Paris: La Documentation française.
  3. DATAR (2000). Aménager la France de 2020. Mettre les territoires en mouvement. Paris: La Documentation Francaise.
  4. Epstein R. (2005). Gouverner à distance. Quand l’état se retire des territoires. Esprit, 11: Novembre, 96-111.
  5. European Commission (2013). Green Infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital. Communication to the Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (COM/2013/0249).
  6. Gaudin J.P. (1999). Gouverner par contrat, l’action publique en question. Paris: Presses de Science Po.
  7. Gravier J.F. (1947). Paris et le désert français. Paris: Flammarion.
  8. Gravier J.F. (1972). Paris et le désert français en 1972. Paris: Flammarion.
  9. Hulbert F. (2014). Millefeuille territorial et décentralisation: de la commune à la région, plaidoyer pour une réforme. Paris: L’Harmattan.
  10. Kestel L. (2018). En marche forcée. Une chronique de la liberalisation des transport, Paris: Raisons d’agir.
  11. Masboungi A., Mangin D. (2009). Agir sur les grands territoires. Paris: Editions du Moniteur.
  12. Mazet P. (2000). Aménagement du Territoire. Paris: Armand Colin.
  13. Paugam P. (a cura di, 2015). Repenser la solidarité. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
  14. Reviglio F. (1998). Principi di Scienza delle finanze. Torino: Utet.
  15. Sénat de France (2017). Décider en 2017 : le temps d’une démocratie coopérative. Rapport d’information n° 556 (2016-2017), tome I.
  16. https://www.senat.fr/notice-rapport/2016/r16-556-1-notice.html
  17. Sénat de France (2023). Mission d’information sur l’avenir de la commune et du maire en France. Présentation à la presse de son rapport.
  18. https://www.senat.fr/fileadmin/Presse/Documents_pdf/20230712_
  19. Rapport_Avenir_Commune_Maire_Tome-I.pdf.
  20. Thoenig J.C., Duran P. (1996). L’État et la gestion publique territoriale. Revue française de science politique, 4: 580-623.
  21. Wenger E. (1998). Comunità di pratica. Apprendimento, significato e identità. Milano: Raffaello Cortina Editore.